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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, 10, and 13, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 8, the phrase “if” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 9, 12, and 14, the phrase "in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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, and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Eppich et al. (DE 10 2018 103 448 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Eppich discloses a tie-bar-less clamping unit for a moulding machine (Fig. 2+; p. 4), comprising:
a machine frame 2, which is formed for absorbing clamping forces, and
a fixed platen 4 arranged stationary in relation to the machine frame 2, and
a movable platen 3 that can move relative to the machine frame, and
at least one push rod, preferably arranged substantially centrally with respect to the movable platen,
wherein at least one pressure pad is arranged between the push rod and the movable platen (FIG. 2-9; pp. 4+).
Regarding claim 11, Eppich discloses the clamping unit comprises a measuring unit 7 for capturing data, wherein the measuring unit is capable of capturing data relating to the application of the clamping force and/or the parallelism of the fixed platen and the movable platen (FIG. 2+; pp. 4, 5-6).
Regarding claim 12, Eppich discloses the clamping unit comprises an evaluation unit 17, equated with the claimed control or regulation unit, capable of controlling or regulating the clamping unit, in particular on the basis of data relating to the application of the clamping force and/or the parallelism of the fixed platen and the movable platen (pp. 5-6).
Regarding claim 13, Eppich discloses a first pressure pad of at least two pressure pads, and the control or regulation unit is capable of controlling or to regulating the first and a second of the at least two pressure pads depending on each other, and/or preferably also independently of each other (FIG. 3, 5, 7, 9; pp. 5-6).
Regarding claim 14, Eppich discloses a moulding machine comprising a substantially C-shaped machine frame, with the clamping unit according to claim 1 (FIG. 9; pp. 4+).
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 2-6, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eppich et al. (DE 10 2018 103 448 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Urbanek (US 5,789,034 A)
Regarding claim 2, Eppich does not appear to expressly disclose a movable ejector support plate.
However, Urbanek discloses a similar tie-bar-less clamping unit (title/abstract; FIG. 1) which includes a ejector support plate 10 between the push rod 1 and movable platen 7 (FIG. 1; 2:56+).
At the time of invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Eppich to include the ejector support plate of Urbanek, in order to provide ejector functionality to the clamping device known in the art.
Regarding claim 3-4, Eppich and Urbanek suggests that the pressure pad may be arranged between the at least one push rod and the ejector support plate or between the ejector support plate and the movable platen, as the inclusion of the ejector support plate in the apparatus of Eppich would necessarily require a selection of one of the claimed locations, e.g. the claimed locations are prima facie obvious to try.
Regarding claim 5-6, Urbanek discloses a pivot 15, equated with the claimed force transmission unit comprising a flexure hinge, is arranged between the at least one push rod 1 and the movable platen 7 (FIG. 1; 2:56+).
Regarding claim 10, Urbanek discloses hydraulic cylinders 12 for opening and closing the molds, equated with the claimed fast stroke drive mechanism for carrying out a fast stroke movement (FIG. 1; 2:45+).
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eppich et al. (DE 10 2018 103 448 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Venrooij et al. (US 7,771,184 B2).
Regarding claim 7, Eppich does not appear to expressly disclose a mold platen mounted on a fluid bed.
However, Venrooij discloses an injection molding machine (title/abstract) which includes a fluid bed upon which the molds are mounted (FIG. 1A-2B; 1:65+).
At the time of invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Eppich to include the fluid bed of Venrooij, in order to simplify and compress the size of the resulting mold tool (Venrooij 1:65+).
Regarding claims 8, Venrooij discloses that the mould platen mounted in a fluid bed, and the movement of the fixed platen and/or the movable platen and/or the mould platen is guided (FIG. 1A-2B; 1:65+).
Regarding claim 9, Venrooij discloses that the fluid bed and the fixed platen and/or the movable platen and/or the at least one mould platen are designed, in particular by a protrusion on the mould platen, such that together they have the function of an in particular double-acting hydraulic cylinder (1:65+).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wimbauer; Gerhard
US 9205584 B2
Romi; Romeu
US 6203312 B1
DIPL ING MARKUS OTTO
AT 16790 U1
GATTRINGER KLAUS HUBERT et al.
DE 102024102399 A1
CHRISTOPH BALKA-HINTERSTEINER DIPL -ING et al.
AT 528004 B1
FRIEDRICH PERNKOPF DIPL -ING DR
AT 18190 U1
LAMPL ALFRED et al.
AT 1127 U1
KAPPELMÜLLER WERNER ING et al.
AT 14594 U1
BADER PASCAL et al.
DE 102021113945 A1
WOBBE HANS et al.
EP 1958751 B1
OTTO MARKUS et al.
DE 102021120713 A1
EPPICH STEPHAN
DE 102016007981 A1
SVOBODA GEORG
EP 0879688 A1
KILIAN FRIEDRICH JOHANNES et al.
DE 102018125919 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Benjamin A Schiffman whose telephone number is (571)270-7626. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-530p EST.
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.
/BENJAMIN A SCHIFFMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742