Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/465,718

INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, INJECTION MOLDING MACHINE, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM STORING PROGRAM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Sep 12, 2023
Examiner
LIANG, SHIBIN
Art Unit
1741
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Sumitomo Heavy Industries, Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
257 granted / 411 resolved
-2.5% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
65 currently pending
Career history
476
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
§103
63.6%
+23.6% vs TC avg
§102
18.7%
-21.3% vs TC avg
§112
13.5%
-26.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 411 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/13/2025 has been entered. Response to Amendment The Amendment filed Dec. 13, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-5, 7-13 remain pending in the application. 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 1-5, 7-8, 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okubo et al. (US 2021/0379807), further in view of Saito et al. (US 2008/0038393). Regarding claim 1, Okubo discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 1, 4, an information processing device that receives an operation of setting an adjustment condition for an automatic adjustment function in an injection molding machine capable of automatically adjusting a molding condition (ABSTRACT), the information processing device comprising: a display device ([0092], lines 1-9 (e.g., an input device and an output device can be connected to the interface (e.g., a display device) of the computing device)) configured to receive from a user ([0124] (i.e., a person determines relationships that are expressed in the form of matrices as shown in Fig. 8); It is noticed that, in [0124], the person or user or operator is following the matrices in Fig. 8 including the quality items such as void volume or dimensions to make a decision through the interface); a quality item related to maintaining a quality of a molding product as the setting of the adjustment condition (for example, as illustrated in Fig. 4, a quality estimation unit 102 and a quality transition storage unit 103 can be considered as the input reception unit to receive the quality item (or data) from the detection data acquisition unit 101 ([0093])); and an adjustment item as an adjustment target for maintaining the quality of the molding product ([0105] (e.g., the relationship storage unit 105 is stored with the modification amounts (i.e., related to the adjustment target) of the molding conditions); As illustrated in Fig. 8, the deviation or the modification amounts are listed which is also determined by the person or user or operator ([0124])); an adjustment condition setting unit configured to set the adjustment condition according to received quality item and the received adjustment target in response to receiving the quality item and the adjustment target (for example, as illustrated in Fig. 4, a modification conditions determination unit 106 can be considered as the adjustment condition setting unit ([0093], [0107])). However, Okubo does not explicitly disclose that, the display device/screen has a first display region including one or more first user interface elements to receive from a user quality information of a molding product and a second display region including one or more second user interface elements to receive from the user adjustment information of the molding product. In the same field of endeavor, injection molding machine, Saito discloses that, as illustrated in Fig. 3, Fig. 3 shows an example of the molding condition setting frame (or screen). Set value columns for the set items designated to the installation setting, among other set items of the molding conditions, are displayed against gray backgrounds ([0049]). For example, the region related to ‘color change’ may be considered as the first user interface element for the user quality information of the molding product and the region of ‘automatic mold thickness adjustment’ may be considered as the second user interface elements to receive from the user adjustment information of the molding product. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okubo to incorporate the teachings of Saito to provide that the display device/screen has a first display region including one or more first user interface elements to receive from a user quality information of a molding product and a second display region including one or more second user interface elements to receive from the user adjustment information of the molding product. Doing so would be possible to provide two selective modes of enabling or disabling rewriting the set values of the molding conditions, as recognized by Saito ([0016]). Regarding claims 2, 3, Okubo discloses that, as illustrated in Fig. 6, the input reception unit receives an input of identification information of the quality item and an input of a possible range of an adjustment value for the quality item (for example, as illustrated in Fig. 6, the quality (e.g., mass or weight) of the mold product No. ([0098], line 4 (those plural mold products)) is illustrated ([0098]); It is noticed that, at least the numbers of those plural mold products are defined as their identifications; Here, symbols “Thmax” and “Thmin” represent an upper limit value and a lower limit value of an allowable quality range ([0098], lines 8-10); It is noticed that, as illustrated in Fig. 6, “A1”, “A2”, and “A2” represent different stages of the mold products (i.e., identified by their numbers) having different quality such as abnormality (A2), standard quality (A1), and standard quality by +N% (A3) ([0099]); It is noticed that, as illustrated in Fig. 8, for example, quality item Mass is determined by the person or user or operator through the interface ([0124])). It is noticed that, the information related to the identifications of the molding products can be considered as the third user interface element to receive from the user. Regarding claims 4, 5, Okubo discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 6, 7, 8, the input reception unit receives an input of identification information of the adjustment item and an input of a possible range of a control value for the adjustment item and the second input reception unit receives a designation of a minimum value and a maximum value allowed as the control value in the input of the possible range of the control value (for example, the modification conditions determination unit 106 determines levels that are closest to deviations obtained by the tendency evaluation unit 104 and employs modification amounts of the molding conditions corresponding to each determined level. For example, as shown in Fig. 7, when the mass deviation is “+2.2%”, a mass deviation level “+2%” in the matrix shown in Fig. 8 is selected ([0107], lines 5-13); It is noticed that, as illustrated in Fig. 6, “A1”, “A2”, and “A2” represent different stages of the mold products (i.e., identified by their numbers) having different quality such as abnormality (A2), standard quality (A1), and standard quality by +N% (A3) ([0099]); It is noticed that, as illustrated in Fig. 8, for example, quality item Mass is determined by the person or user or operator through the interface ([0124])). It is noticed that, the information related to the identifications of the molding products can be considered as the third user interface element to receive from the user. Regarding claims 7, 8, Okubo discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 4, 6, 7, 8, for example, the molding conditions determination assist device 3 is equipped with a computing device having a processor, a storage device, an interface, etc. and an input device and an output device that can be connected to the interface of the computing device. For example, the output device may be configured so as to include a display device ([0092], lines 3-9). Thus, as illustrated in Fig. 6, a first input unit for performing an input to the first input reception unit and a second input unit for performing an input to the second input reception unit are displayed in the display device. Okubo discloses that, as illustrated in Fig. 6, symbol “Std” represents prescribed standard quality ([0098], lines 7-8) and can be considered as a reference value of a possible range of a control value specified based on an actual molding result in the adjustment item of the second input unit displayed according to the input on the first input unit. It is noticed that, as illustrated in Fig. 8, the person or user or operator determines relationships that are expressed in the form of matrices as shown in Fig. 8 and matrices as shown in Fig. 8 can be generated by machine leaning ([0124]). Thus, it is practical that the quality item Mass shown in Fig. 6 is displayed in the screen for the person or user or operator to monitor. However, Okubo does not explicitly disclose that, the display device/screen has a first display region including one or more first user interface elements to receive from a user quality information of a molding product and a second display region including one or more second user interface elements to receive from the user adjustment information of the molding product. Saito discloses that, as illustrated in Fig. 3, Fig. 3 shows an example of the molding condition setting frame (or screen). Set value columns for the set items designated to the installation setting, among other set items of the molding conditions, are displayed against gray backgrounds ([0049]). For example, the region related to ‘color change’ may be considered as the first user interface element for the user quality information of the molding product and the region of ‘automatic mold thickness adjustment’ may be considered as the second user interface elements to receive from the user adjustment information of the molding product. Regarding claims 9-10, Okubo discloses the display device for operating the injection molding machine. However, Okubo does not explicitly disclose a valid setting unit and an input fixing unit for operating the injection molding process. In the same field of endeavor, injection molding machine, Saito discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 2a, 2b, 2c, in this case, Fig. 2b is displayed if the password that permits change of the set values for the set items designated to the installation setting is entered on the screen shown in Fig. 2a. If the installation setting unlock button 31 is depressed, moreover, the screen shown in Fig. 2c is displayed. If the change start button 33a is depressed, the installation setting is unlocked, whereupon the set values for the set items designated to the installation setting can be changed on each molding condition setting frame ([0071]). Thus, at least Saito provides the functions of both the valid setting unit and the input fixing unit for operators to lock or change the setting through the screen of the control device related to the molding process as needed. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okubo to incorporate the teachings of Saito to provide a valid setting unit and an input fixing unit for operating the injection molding process through the screen of the computer device in the injection molding machine. Doing so would be possible to provide two selective modes of enabling or disabling rewriting the set values of the molding conditions, as recognized by Saito ([0016]). Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okubo et al. (US 2021/0379807), further in view of Saito et al. (US 2008/0038393). Regarding claim 11, Okubo discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 1, 4, an injection molding machine comprising: an injection unit (as shown in Fig. 1); a mold clamping unit (item 50 including 51, 52, and 53, Fig. 1 ([0080])); a processing device (items 3, 4, and 5, Figs, 1, 4, 12 ([0138], [0139], [0140], [0141])) that receives an operation of setting an adjustment condition for the automatic adjustment function, the processing device configured to receive from a user (e.g., a person determines relationships that are expressed in the form of matrices as shown in Fig. 8 ([0124]); It is noticed that, molding conditions (i.e., related to the process device) such as injection rate, holding pressure, etc. are involved in the process of the determination by the person): a quality item related to maintaining a quality of a molding product as the setting of the adjustment condition (for example, as illustrated in Fig. 4, a quality estimation unit 102 and a quality transition storage unit 103 can be considered as the first input reception unit ([0093])), and as an adjustment target for maintaining the quality of the molding product as the setting of the adjustment condition ([0105] (e.g., the relationship storage unit 105 is stored with the modification amounts (i.e., related to the adjustment target) of the molding conditions)); and a control device that has the automatic adjustment function to set a molding condition and that controls the injection unit and the mold clamping unit according to the received quality item and the received adjustment target in response to receiving the quality item and the adjustment target (for example, as illustrated in Fig. 4, the control device 60 is running based on that a modification conditions determination unit 106 is inputted from the tendency evaluation unit 104 and the relationship storage unit 105 (here, the relationship storage unit is providing the required adjustment target) ([0093], [0105], [0107])). However, Okubo does not explicitly disclose that, the display device/screen has a first display region including one or more first user interface elements to receive from a user quality information of a molding product and a second display region including one or more second user interface elements to receive from the user adjustment information of the molding product. In the same field of endeavor, injection molding machine, Saito discloses that, as illustrated in Fig. 3, Fig. 3 shows an example of the molding condition setting frame (or screen). Set value columns for the set items designated to the installation setting, among other set items of the molding conditions, are displayed against gray backgrounds ([0049]). For example, the region related to ‘color change’ may be considered as the first user interface element for the user quality information of the molding product and the region of ‘automatic mold thickness adjustment’ may be considered as the second user interface elements to receive from the user adjustment information of the molding product. Regarding claims 12, 13, Okubo discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 1, 4, the control device includes a notification unit that notifies a user when content of the adjustment by the automatic adjustment function satisfies a notification condition predetermined for the setting of the adjustment condition received by the processing device, wherein the control device stops operations of the injection unit and the mold clamping unit when content of the adjustment by the automatic adjustment function satisfies a stop condition predetermined for the setting of the adjustment condition received by the processing device ([]0079-[0081]). Thus, Okubo discloses that, in the control device 60, the function acquires various kinds information from the injection machine sensor 37 and the clamping device sensor 55 (i.e., it is noticed that, the clamping device sensors are capable of detecting a clamping force for the operating of the clamping device including its stop condition predetermined) and controls the drive device 36 of the injection machine 30 and the drive device 54 of the clamping device 50 so that they operate according to operation command data with the help from the molding conditions determination assist device 3 (as illustrated in Fig. 4). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/13/2025 have been fully considered. In response to applicant’s arguments (as amended) in claims 1 and 11 that the base reference Okubo does not disclose that, the display device/screen has a first display region including one or more first user interface elements to receive from a user quality information of a molding product and a second display region including one or more second user interface elements to receive from the user adjustment information of the molding product, it is persuasive. However, in the same field of endeavor, injection molding machine, Saito discloses that, as illustrated in Fig. 3, Fig. 3 shows an example of the molding condition setting frame (or screen). Set value columns for the set items designated to the installation setting, among other set items of the molding conditions, are displayed against gray backgrounds ([0049]). For example, the region related to ‘color change’ may be considered as the first user interface element for the user quality information of the molding product and the region of ‘automatic mold thickness adjustment’ may be considered as the second user interface elements to receive from the user adjustment information of the molding product. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIBIN LIANG whose telephone number is (571)272-8811. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30 - 4:30. 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, Alison L Hindenlang can be reached on 571 270 7001. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /SHIBIN LIANG/Examiner, Art Unit 1741 /ALISON L HINDENLANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 12, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 03, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 03, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 16, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 29, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 13, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 09, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 09, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594716
SHAPING METHOD AND SHAPING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583264
Pneumatic Tire
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583796
Method for producing carbonized or graphitized molding parts
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576573
HOT-RUNNER MOLD AND DEVICE FOR MANUFACTURING RESIN CONTAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576560
METHOD FOR OBTAINING A RECYCLED MATERIAL FROM MULTILAYER PET CONTAINERS AND RECYCLED MATERIAL OBTAINED USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+18.5%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 411 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month