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 .
Response to Amendment
In the applicant’s reply of 19 February 2026, the claims were amended. Based on these amendments, the claim objection included in the previous office action is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
The applicant’s arguments with respect to the § 103 rejections based on Komiya and Yokobayashi have been fully considered and are persuasive. The examiner agrees that this combination fails to meet all the limitations of the independent claims as amended, particularly regarding the movement of the injection member being stopped for the entire duration of the stop process. Therefore, the § 103 rejections are withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Tokuno. See below.
Claim Interpretation
As previously noted, certain claims refer to a value offset from a set value of the pressure at a time of start of the holding pressure process to a high pressure side by a predetermined amount. This is understood as referring to a value that is offset by a predetermined positive amount from the set value of the pressure at the start of the holding pressure process so as to be greater than the set value by the predetermined amount.
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, 2, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by EP 3 012 085 (“Tokuno”).
Regarding claim 1, Tokuno discloses a control device of an injection molding machine (the controller 70; see Figure 1 and [0011]) including an injection member that pushes a molding material (the screw 43, which feeds molding material within the cylinder 41; see Figure 1 and [0031]) and an injection drive source that moves the injection member (the injection motor 46; see Figure 1 and [0033]), the control device comprising:
an injection control unit that controls a timing for switching from a stop process for stopping a movement of the injection member to a holding pressure process for controlling a pressure acting on the molding material from the injection member, the movement of the injection member stopped for an entire duration of the stop process (the controller 70 carries out a filling process and a hold pressure process; see [0035]. At time t1 in the middle of the filling process, the setting speed of the screw 43 is reduced from V0 to V1; see [0043] and Figure 2. Per [0044], V1 may be zero, i.e., the screw 43 may be stopped. When V1 is zero, the screw 43 is stopped for the entire period from t1 to t2, constituting a stop process during which the movement of the injection member is stopped for its entire duration. At time t2, the controller 70 performs V/P switchover to the hold pressure process, which controls pressure acting on the molding material from the screw 43; see [0037] and [0046]); and
a pressure monitoring unit that monitors an actual value of the pressure in the stop process (the pressure detector 47 detects the pressure that the screw 43 receives from the molding material, which is equivalent to pressure acting on the molding material from the screw 43; see [0034]. The pressure detector 47 monitors the pressure after the speed switchover time t1, i.e., during the stop process when V1 = 0; see [0042] and [0046]),
wherein the injection control unit switches the stop process to the holding pressure process at a timing set based on an actual value of a time having passed from a start of the stop process or the actual value of the pressure in the stop process satisfying a predetermined condition (per [0050], after the speed switchover time t1, when the pressure of the molding material continues dropping and reaches a predetermined switchover setting pressure, the controller 70 performs the V/P switchover. The pressure reaching the predetermined switchover setting pressure reads on “the actual value of the pressure in the stop process satisfying a predetermined condition.” Additionally, per [0046]-[0047], the controller 70 performs V/P switchover based on the time differential of the detection value of the pressure detector 47 exceeding a reference value, which is also a predetermined condition based on an actual value of the pressure).
Regarding claim 2, Tokuno discloses that the predetermined condition is related to a set value of the pressure at a time of start of the holding pressure process (the predetermined switchover setting pressure of [0050] is related to the holding pressure set value, as both are pressure parameters governing the transition into and behavior of the hold pressure process; see [0037] and [0050]), and the set value is a value set by a user or a value calculated on the basis of a user’s setting (the switchover setting pressure and the holding pressure are user-set parameters; see [0037] and [0050]).
Regarding claim 11, Tokuno discloses an injection molding machine (see Figure 1 and [0011]) comprising: the control device according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1); the injection member (the screw 43; see Figure 1 and [0031]); and the injection drive source (the injection motor 46; see Figure 1 and [0033]).
Regarding claim 12, Tokuno discloses a method of controlling an injection molding machine including an injection member that pushes a molding material and an injection drive source that moves the injection member (the screw 43 and the injection motor 46; see Figure 1, [0031], and [0033]), the method comprising:
a step of controlling a timing for switching from a stop process for stopping a movement of the injection member to a holding pressure process for controlling a pressure acting on the molding material from the injection member, the movement of the injection member stopped for an entire duration of the stop process (see the rejection of claim 1. The controller 70 carries out the filling process and the hold pressure process, with the screw 43 stopped when V1 = 0 during the period from t1 to t2; see [0035], [0037], [0043]-[0044], and [0046]); and
a step of monitoring an actual value of the pressure in the stop process (the pressure detector 47 monitors the pressure during the stop process; see [0034], [0042], and [0046]),
wherein switching from the stop process to the holding pressure process is performed at a timing set based on an actual value of a time having passed from a start of the stop process or the actual value of the pressure in the stop process satisfying a predetermined condition (see the rejection of claim 1. The second alternative is satisfied; see [0046]-[0047] and [0050]).
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.
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 3, 4, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tokuno, as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of JP 2005-313409 (“Yokobayashi”) (cited in an IDS).
Regarding claim 3, Tokuno discloses that the controller 70 performs V/P switchover in the current shot based on an actual value of the pressure in the stop process (when V1 = 0) (see [0046]-[0047] and [0050]), but does not disclose that the switchover is based on a value offset from the set value of the pressure at the time of start of the holding pressure process to a high pressure side by a predetermined amount.
Yokobayashi relates to controlling the changeover from an injection process to a holding pressure process in an injection molding machine (see the abstract and [0001] of the previously-provided translation) and teaches that there is a control or response delay after commands are issued ([0027]). This delay is taken into account in controlling the changeover ([0019]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have taken control delay into account in Tokuno’s switchover from the stop process to the hold pressure process to help ensure accurate control during process switching, as taught by Yokobayashi ([0019]).
In Tokuno, when V1 = 0, the pressure is decreasing during the stop process (the pressure drops after the speed switchover time t1; see [0045] and Figure 3). As a result, any time delay after a switchover command is issued would result in the pressure being lower when the command is executed than when the command is issued. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that, to account for this, the stop process should switch to the hold pressure process when the detected pressure is above the desired holding pressure by a predetermined offset amount, i.e., at a value offset from the set value of the pressure at the time of start of the holding pressure process to a high pressure side by a predetermined amount, as claimed.
Regarding claim 4, modified Tokuno discloses that the injection control unit switches the stop process to the holding pressure process at a timing when the actual value of the pressure reaches the value offset from the set value of the pressure at the time of start of the holding pressure process to the high pressure side by the predetermined amount in the stop process of the n-th shot (see the rejection of claim 3; specifically, to account for control delay, the stop process switches to the hold pressure process when the detected pressure, which is falling during the stop process, reaches the offset value).
Regarding claim 7, modified Tokuno does not disclose that a setting of whether or not the injection control unit uses the value offset from the set value of the pressure at the time of start of the holding pressure process to the high pressure side by the predetermined amount is switchable. In particular, Yokobayashi does not explicitly disclose that taking control delay into account is optional. However, it is well known in the art to provide a computing or control device with optional features that can be selectively enabled or disabled by a user. Additionally, Tokuno does not itself disclose that control delay should or must be accounted for, which indicates that this feature is not required for proper operation of Tokuno’s injection molding machine. In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have allowed the user to choose whether control delay is accounted for.
Regarding claim 8, please see the rejection of claim 7. It is well known in the art to provide an injection molding machine with a display and input means to enable the user to set parameters, select settings, and the like. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a display unit with an input section for allowing the user to choose whether control delay is accounted for, since providing a user interface for selectable settings is a common and routine design choice in injection molding machine controllers.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tokuno, as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Yokobayashi and US 2015/0140148 (“Komiya”).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Tokuno and Yokobayashi discloses switchover from the stop process to the holding pressure process based on the actual value of the pressure and an offset value. See the rejection of claim 3. However, modified Tokuno does not disclose setting a time of the stop process of an (n+1)-th or subsequent shot on the basis of an actual value of the pressure in the stop process of an n-th shot and the offset value.
Komiya relates to a controller for an injection molding machine that provides an intermediate process (similar to the claimed stop process) between the injection process and the packing process (see the abstract and [0039]). Komiya teaches storing a pressure waveform obtained when a conforming product is molded and using the stored pressure waveform as the target pressure for the intermediate process in subsequent molding cycles ([0049]-[0050]). This establishes the principle of using data measured during a prior shot’s intermediate process to set control parameters for subsequent shots.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied Komiya’s teaching of using prior-shot data to set parameters for subsequent shots in the modified Tokuno system. Specifically, once the offset-based pressure threshold (P1 + ΔP) is established per the Yokobayashi modification, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that recording the time at which the pressure reaches the offset value during the stop process of an n-th shot and using that time to pre-set the duration of the stop process for the (n+1)-th or subsequent shot would be a straightforward and computationally simpler alternative to real-time pressure monitoring for each shot. Such shot-to-shot parameter adjustment based on measured data is a well-known control strategy in injection molding, as demonstrated by Komiya.
Regarding claim 6, modified Tokuno discloses that the injection control unit sets the time of the stop process of the (n+1)-th or subsequent shot on the basis of a time when the actual value of the pressure in the stop process of the n-th shot reaches the value offset from the set value of the pressure at the time of start of the holding pressure process to the high pressure side by the predetermined amount (see the rejection of claim 5; specifically, the time at which the pressure reaches the offset value (P1 + ΔP) in the n-th shot is recorded and used to set the stop process duration for the (n+1)-th or subsequent shot).
Claims 9, 10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tokuno, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Komiya.
Regarding claim 9, Tokuno discloses that the controller 70 can perform V/P switchover based on multiple approaches: based on the time differential of the pressure detection value exceeding a reference value ([0046]-[0047]), or when the pressure reaches a predetermined switchover setting pressure ([0050]). However, Tokuno does not explicitly disclose that a setting of whether or not the injection control unit switches the stop process to the holding pressure process based on the actual value of the time or the actual value of the pressure satisfying the predetermined condition is switchable.
It is well known in the art to provide a computing or control device with different operating modes that a user can select between. Since Tokuno already teaches multiple switchover approaches, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have allowed the user to select between different switchover modes, including time-based and pressure-based switchover (see the rejection of claim 5 regarding the use of time for controlling the stop process). Providing user-selectable operating modes in injection molding machine controllers is a common and routine design choice.
Regarding claim 10, please see the rejection of claim 9. It is well known in the art to provide an injection molding machine with a display and input means to enable the user to set parameters, select settings, and the like. For example, Komiya discloses an LCD/MDI 25 with a display unit (see [0036] and Figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a display unit with an input section for allowing the user to select between the different switchover modes, since providing a user interface for selectable settings is a common and routine design choice in injection molding machine controllers.
Regarding claim 13, please see the rejections of claims 9 and 10. The analysis therein applies equally to claim 13. Specifically, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a display unit that displays an input section configured to receive a setting for selecting whether to switch the stop process to the holding pressure process based on the actual value of the time having passed from the start of the stop process or the actual value of the pressure in the stop process, since providing user-selectable operating modes on a display is a common and routine design choice in injection molding machine controllers.
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to John DeRusso whose telephone number is (571)270-1287. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:00 AM-6:00 PM ET.
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, 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.
/John J DeRusso/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744