DETAILED ACTION
In Reply filed on 12/23/2025, claims 1-19 are pending. Claims 13 and 14 are currently amended. No claim is canceled, and claims 15-19 are newly added. Claims 1-12 are withdrawn. Claims 13-19 are considered in this Office 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 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 13-15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jessrang (US 20150328829 A1) in view of Koehn (US 20200298500 A1) and Haynes (US 20120100339 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Jessrang teaches a molding method for molding a workpiece by using heated upper (10) and lower (8) molds while transferring the workpiece in a transfer direction ([0020-0022] and fig. 1; [0020]: the tool mold 8 (with a fiber-reinforced shell element 2) can be traversed in the longitudinal direction; [0020]: a lower tool mold 8 having a heating device 18; [0021]: head 10 having a heating device), the molding method comprising:
heating the upper mold to a first predetermined temperature ([0021]: head 10 having a heating device; [0022]: the pressure application head is heated to a temperature matched to the desired material properties of the thermoplastics);
heating the lower mold to a second predetermined temperature ([0020]: a lower tool mold 8 having a heating device 18);
[preheating the workpiece by the upper mold];
first moving the lower mold supporting the workpiece relative to the upper mold in the transfer direction (figs. 1 and 2; [0022]: the tool mold 8 continues to execute a continuous feed movement in the longitudinal direction L while the pressure application head 10 moves along a quasi-circular path);
pressing the workpiece by the upper mold (figs. 1 and 2; [0022]: the pressure application head 10 moves along a quasi-circular path, in particular a lowering movement 24 and a feed direction movement 26); and
locating the upper mold away from the workpiece and second moving the lower mold relative to the upper mold in the transfer direction (figs. 1 and 2; [0022]: the tool mold 8 continues to execute a continuous feed movement in the longitudinal direction L while the pressure application head 10 moves along a quasi-circular path, in particular a raising movement 28).
Jessrang does not specifically teaches the bracketed limitation(s) as presented above, but Koehn teaches the limitation(s) as follows:
Koehn teaches a tool and a method for consolidating thermoplastic parts (abstract). The tool comprises a heating assembly comprising one or more heating surfaces, to receive one or more thermoplastic parts and to apply a consolidation temperature to the one or more thermoplastic parts (claim 1, figs. 1, 2, 5, 6). The heating assembly preheat the thermoplastic parts 500 in one or more heating surfaces 230 generating a heat by induction coils 271 and/or a top/bottom heating surface 232, 231, and controller 273 may control the heating and cooling (by coolant channels 272) of the heating assembly in localized areas (figs. 1-3, 5-6 and [0083], [0108-0110]).
Both Jessrang and Koehn teach a tool and a method for consolidating a thermoplastic material (Jessrang: fig. 1, abstract; Koehn: figs. 5-6, abstract). Jessrang also teaches that the workpiece has previously been heated in a furnace before pressing down, and the pressure application head is heated to a temperature matched to the desired material properties of the thermoplastics (Jessrang: [0022]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing invention to modify the tool of Jessrang to further include the heating assembly comprising both heating and cooling elements in the upper and lower consolidating parts as taught by Koehn in order to achieve known results or a reasonable expectation of successful results of controlling a temperature of the workpiece in localized areas during the consolidation process (e.g., preheating, pressing, cooling steps) in a desired range, enabling faster and more efficient production cycles without a need for a separate furnace and a conveyance system to convey a preheated workpiece into the consolidating tool (Koehn: derived from [0004, 0110]; Jessrang: derived from [0022]).
Modified Jessrang (Jessrang in view of Koehn) still does not specifically teach that “the upper mold includes temperature-controlled regions adjacent to one another in the transfer direction” and “controlling respective temperatures of each temperature-controlled regions of the upper mold to be in descending order from upstream to downstream in the transfer direction,” but Haynes teaches the limitations as follows:
Haynes teaches methods for forming polymers including heating of a polymer to be formed to a temperature above its glass transition temperature and applying a molding surface to the polymer while the polymer remains its glass transition temperature, and allowing the polymer to transition to below the glass transition temperature while within or between the upper and lower molding surfaces (abstract, figs. 6, 9). Haynes teaches that the upper mold (upper mold having upper molding surface 3) includes temperature-controlled regions (TZ-3 through TZ-7) adjacent to one another in the transfer direction and controlling respective temperatures of each temperature-controlled regions of the upper mold to be in descending order (from TZ-3 (high) to TZ-7 (low)) from upstream to downstream in the transfer direction of a workpiece ([0182-0194], figs. 6-12).
In the same field of forming a shaped polymer composite upon heating and press molding (Jessrang: fig. 1, abstract; Haynes: figs. 6-12, abstract), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing invention to modify the upper mold of modified Jessrang, which comprises the heating assembly so as to control the temperature therein in localized area (Koehn: [0083, 0108-0110]), to further have a plurality of temperature-controlled regions in which the respective temperatures are controlled in descending order from upstream to downstream in the transfer direction of a workpiece as taught by Haynes in order to obtain known results or a reasonable expectation of successful results of forming the shaped polymer structure in a continuous manner with energy saving and reduced cycle times by rapidly switching temperatures of a workpiece upon the status of the molding process by the upper mold comprising corresponding temperature-controlled regions – e.g., a first region holding a temperature for preparing a heated workpiece before pressing, a second region holding a temperature for providing an optimum heat while pressing, and a third region holding a temperature for readily cooling down the pressed workpiece, along the moving speed/direction of the workpiece (Haynes: derived from [0005-0007]; Jessrang: derived from [0022]: continuous feed movement of the tool mold 8 in the direction L).
Regarding claim 14, modified Jessrang teaches the molding method according to claim 13, wherein in the first moving and the second moving of the lower mold relative to the upper mold in the transfer direction, a temperature of the lower mold in contact with the pressed workpiece is lowered below a temperature that the lower mold had during the pressing of the workpiece (Jessrang: figs. 1, 2 and [0022]; Koehn: fig. 3 and [0108-0112]; Haynes: [0182-0194]: lower molding surface 2 having respective temperatures in heating zone (HZ, e.g., TZ-2) and cooling zone (CZ), and die pressure point Dp therebetween, figs. 6-12).
Here, it would have been also obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing invention to modify the lower mold of modified Jessrang, which comprises the heating assembly so as to control the temperature therein in localized area (Koehn: [0083, 0108-0110]), to further have a plurality of temperature-controlled regions in which the respective temperatures are controlled differently before and after pressing as taught by Haynes in order to obtain known results or a reasonable expectation of successful results of forming the shaped polymer structure in a continuous manner with energy saving and reduced cycle times by rapidly switching temperatures of a workpiece upon the status of the molding process by the lower mold comprising corresponding temperature-controlled regions – e.g., a first region holding a temperature for preparing a heated workpiece before pressing, and a second region holding a temperature for providing an optimum heat while pressing, and a third region holding a temperature for readily cooling down the pressed workpiece, along with the pressing status of the workpiece (Haynes: derived from [0005-0007]; Jessrang: derived from [0022]: continuous feed movement of the tool mold 8 in the direction L).
Regarding claim 15, modified Jessrang teaches the molding method according to claim 13, wherein the upper mold has five temperature-controlled regions (Haynes: fig. 9).
Regarding claim 19, modified Jessrang does not specifically teach that a length of the lower mold is 2500 mm. Here, a relative dimension of the lower mold would be variable depending on a dimension of a molded article, and the lower mold having the recited dimension would not perform differently from the device of modified Jessrang. Thus, the recitation of the relative dimension would not make the claim to be patentably distinct from the prior art. See MPEP 2144.04 IV. A (In Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device).
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jessrang (US 20150328829 A1), Koehn (US 20200298500 A1), and Haynes (US 20120100339 A1) as applied to claim 13, and further in view of Halford (US 20180215083 A1).
Regarding claims 16 and 17, modified Jessrang teaches the molding method according to claim 13, but does not specifically teach that a temperature of the lower mold is detected by a temperature sensor (claim 16), and the temperature sensor is a thermocouple (claim 17).
Halford teaches a method of molding and apparatus therefor, in which a workpiece is preheated and/or post-cooled before and/or after a molding process, allowing optimal use of the tool for high precision molding operations (abstract). Halford teaches a temperature of the lower mold is detected by a temperature sensor, and the temperature sensor is a thermocouple ([0124]: selectively heating and cooling areas of the mould layers 104, 106 using zonal temperature control in which the thermocouples 152 provide an input to a control system (not shown) for controlling the heating and cooling supplied by the temperature control assemblies 142; fig. 3).
In the same field of endeavor of molding upon heating, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing invention to modify the lower mold of modified Jessrang, which comprises the heating assembly so as to control the temperature therein in localized area (Koehn: [0083, 0108-0110]), to further have zonal temperature sensor such as thermocouples as taught by Halford in order to obtain known results or a reasonable expectation of successful results of providing an input into a control system for controlling heating and cooling supped to the lower mold in localized zones so as to optimize molding process for high precision molding operations (Halford: derived from abstract, [0124]).
Claims 16 (alternatively) and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jessrang (US 20150328829 A1), Koehn (US 20200298500 A1), and Haynes (US 20120100339 A1) as applied to claim 13, and further in view of Göbel (US 20170043507 A1).
Regarding claims 16 and 18, modified Jessrang teaches the molding method according to claim 13, but does not specifically teach that a temperature of the lower mold is detected by a temperature sensor (claim 16), and the temperature sensor is an infrared camera (claim 18).
Göbel teaches a device and a method for the thermal reshaping of hose blanks (abstract). Göbel teaches that the device includes a measurement device (sensor) 10 is thermos sensor that is focused on the outer surface 6’’ of the molding tool 1’’, especially based on infrared radiation emitted by the molding tool 1’’, and the sensor 10 can be an IR camera for recording two-dimensional IR images ([0057-0058], fig. 4).
In the same field of endeavor of shaping of an article upon heating and molding, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing invention to modify the lower mold of modified Jessrang, which comprises the heating assembly so as to control the temperature therein in localized area (Koehn: [0083, 0108-0110]), to further have a temperature sensor such as an IR camera as taught by Göbel in order to obtain known results or a reasonable expectation of successful results of monitoring/verifying temperature distribution over the molding surface so as to ensure high precision molding operations (Göbel: derived from [0059]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 13 (which have been newly amended by the applicants) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection have been made due to the newly added features from the applicant’s latest amendment filed on 12/23/2025.
The basis of the applicant’s argument is based upon the changes regarding the upper mold having a plurality of temperature-controlled regions in which respective temperatures are controlled in a specific order. After further search and reconsideration, the Haynes reference is applied to the rejection. Thus, when modified Jessrang’s teaching is further modified in view of Haynes, modified Jessrang does teach/suggest all the claimed limitations and the motivation to combine. Thereby, after reconsideration, claim 13 remains rejected.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Charest (US 20230249384 A1) teaches a machine and method for continuous compression molding of a thermoplastic composite material, by providing heating, compressing, cooling, relaxing and demolding zones in the machine (claims 1, 18 and figs. 1-3).
Matsuzuki (US 20150197039 A1) teaches a shape forming system according to one embodiment includes a mold assemblies (abstract, fig. 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to INJA SONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1605. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. 8 AM - 5 PM.
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, Xiao (Sam) Zhao can be reached at (571)270-5343. 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.
/INJA SONG/Examiner, Art Unit 1744