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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I (Claims 1 – 8) in the reply filed on (8 – 5 – 2025) is acknowledged. Consequently, Claim(s) 9 – 15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention(s), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the same reply filed on (8 – 5 – 2025). Highlighting, applicant's amendments have made Invention II (Claims 9 – 15) dependent on the specific apparatus claimed in Invention I (Claims 1 – 8). As a result, Invention II will be automatically rejoined with the issuance of a Notice of Allowability for Invention I.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show a separate cover member that may be coupled to the opposite sides of the cylinder “M” for a hydrogen storage tank in the first direction to seal the hydrogen as described in ([0046]) of the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered, and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
A.) Claim(s) 1 – 8, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by / unpatentable over Yoichiro Baba (US 20200039132 A1, hereinafter Baba)Regarding claim 1,
A mold device comprising:
an outer mold part including a first outer mold, and
a second outer mold configured to be oved toward the first outer mold to form a molding space with the first outer mold; and
an inner mold part including an inner mold configured to be moved between a molding position disposed in the molding space of the outer mold part and
an exit position deviating from the molding space,
the inner mold part configured to mold a cylinder having a hollow part extending in a first direction between the inner mold and the outer mold part when the outer mold part is located in the molding position,
wherein the inner mold is formed to correspond to the cylinder to form a space allowing introduction of a resin.
Baba teaches the following:
([0053]) teaches the injection molding die 3 includes a fixed die 10 fixed to a mounting plate of an injection machine (not shown). Where the fixed die 10 acts as applicant’s first outer mold part.
([0056]) teaches that the movable die 20 includes a base portion 21, the core portion (a core) 23, and two outer core portions 25, 27. Where the base portion 21 acts as applicant’s second outer mold configured to be oved toward the first outer mold to form a molding space with the first outer mold. This is best illustrated in (Figs. 1 – 3).
([0056]) teaches that the movable die 20 includes a base portion 21, the core portion (a core) 23, and two outer core portions 25, 27. Where the core portion (a core) 23 and two outer core portions 25, 27 acts as applicant’s inner mold part including an inner mold configured to be moved between a molding position disposed in the molding space of the outer mold part via movement of the base portion 21.
([0078]) teaches that the movable die 20 is pulled in the die axis MA direction so as to separate from the fixed die 10 as indicated by a black arrow in (Fig. 4). As illustrated in (Fig. 4) the base portion 21 is separated from the fixed die 10 by the movement of the base portion 21.
As illustrated in (Fig. 5), the hollow body 40 manufactured is found to comprise a cylinder having a hollow part extending in a first direction between the inner mold and the outer mold part when the outer mold part is located in the molding position.
([0073]) teaches that as illustrated in (Fig. 2), in a state (mold clamping state) where the fixed die 10 and the movable die 20 are closed, the molten resin is injected from the injection machine into the resin inlet 12 via an injection nozzle 9 as indicated by a blank arrow in FIG. 2.
Regarding claim 2 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the inner mold includes:
a first inner mold; and
a second inner mold distinguished from the first inner mold, and
wherein the first inner mold and the second inner mold are configured to be moved toward each other.
Baba teaches the following:
– c.) ([0061]) teaches that the two outer core portions 25, 27 are configured to form the outer peripheral surface 41 b (see FIG. 8A) of the resin hollow body 40. The two outer core portions 25, 27 are connected to the base portion 21 via rails (not shown) so as to be slidable in the up-down direction and are also connected to the fixed die 10 via rails (not shown) so as to be slidable in the inclination direction of the recessed portion 11. Hereby, as illustrated in FIG. 1B, the two outer core portions 25, 27 are configured as split dies that separate from each other in the up-down direction in conjunction with the mold opening of the fixed die 10 and the movable die 20 so as to be released from the outer peripheral surface 41 b of the resin hollow body 40. In other words, the two outer core portions 25, 27 are configured to separate outwardly in the radial direction from the core portion 23 in conjunction with the fixed die 10 separating from the core portion 23 to the second side in the axial direction. As such, the two outer core portions 25, 27 act as applicant’s first inner mold and second inner mold distinguished from the first inner mold, such that two outer core portions 25, 27 are configured to be moved toward each other as illustrated across (Figs. 1 A – B).
Regarding claim 3 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the outer mold part further includes:
an inner peripheral surface formed to correspond to an outer surface of the cylinder; and
a flange groove disposed at one end of the inner peripheral surface in the first direction, and
formed in a concave shape in a second direction that is radially outward from the first direction from the inner peripheral surface.
Baba teaches the following:
– c.) ([0105]) teaches that the resin hollow body 60 is molded by use of an injection molding die 3′ including a fixed die 10′ and a movable die 20′. Similarly to the fixed die 10, a recessed portion 11′ is formed in the fixed die 10′, and in addition to this, a spherical recessed portion 13 is formed such that a bottom face 11 a′ of the recessed portion 11′ is recessed in a generally hemispherical shape, and a protruding portion 14 having a generally pillar shape is formed so as to extend toward the first side in the axial direction inside the spherical recessed portion 13. Note that the resin inlet 12′ penetrates through the protruding portion 1. As illustrated in (Fig. 10) the fixed die 10′ is found to include a bottom face 11 a′ of the recessed portion 11′ & a spherical recessed portion 13 along with a protruding portion 14 both of which (11 and 13 with 14 ) may act as a flange groove disposed at one end of the inner peripheral surface in the first direction and formed in a concave shape in a second direction that is radially outward from the first direction from the inner peripheral surface.
Regarding claim 4 as applied to claim 3,
Wherein the outer mold part further includes:
a first flange surface configured to form the flange groove, and
extending from the one end of the inner peripheral surface in the first direction toward the second direction;
a second flange surface extending from the first flange surface in the first direction; and
a third flange surface extending from the second flange surface in an opposite direction to the second direction.
Baba teaches the following:
& b.) ([0107]) teaches as illustrated in (Fig. 10), the protruding portion 14 with the vertical wall portion leading towards the recessed portion 13 acts as applicant’s first flange surface extending from the one end of the inner peripheral surface in the first direction toward the second direction.
([0107]) teaches as illustrated in (Fig. 10) a distal surface 14 a of the protruding portion 14 can be seen. Where the distal surface 14 a acts as a second flange surface extending from the first flange surface in the first direction.
([0107]) teaches as illustrated in (Fig. 10) the same protruding portion 14 where with the other vertical wall portion leading towards the other recessed portion 13 acts as applicant’s third flange surface extending from the second flange surface in an opposite direction to the second direction. As illustrated in (Fig. 10), the mouthpiece attachment portion 67 is formed between the protruding portion 14.
Regarding claim 5 as applied to claim 3,
Wherein one end of the inner mold in the first direction is disposed in the first direction of the flange groove when the inner mold is located in the molding position.
Baba teaches the following:
([0107]) teaches as illustrated in (Fig. 10), one end of the inner mold in the first direction is found to be disposed in the first direction of the flange groove during mold, i.e., when the inner mold is located within the cavity formed in the molding position.
Regarding claim 6 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the inner mold part further includes:
a push rod connected to the inner mold; and
an actuator connected to the push rod and configured to contract or extend the push rod.
Baba teaches the following:
& b. ) ([0056]) teaches that the extrusion device 5 includes a mechanical ejector (not shown), an ejector ring 31, a plurality of rods 32, an ejector plate 33, and an ejector pin 34. Where an ejector ring 31 and a plurality of rods 32 / mechanical ejector act as applicant’s push rod and actuator connected to the push rod respectively. Highlighting, as illustrated in (Figs. 7 & 10 – 11) the ejector ring 31 and is found to be slide across / connected to the inner mold as it travels to eject the article from the mold.
Regarding claim 7 as applied to claim 6,
Wherein the inner mold includes an insertion part configured such that the actuator is inserted into an interior of the inner mold when the inner mold is in the exit position.
Baba teaches the following:
([0069]) teaches that the ejector pin 34 is configured to advance and retreat in the die axis MA direction by the mechanical ejector, and hereby, the ejector plate 33 and the rods 32 advance and retreat in the die axis MA direction. In conjunction with the advance and retreat of them, the ejector ring 31 is accommodated in the recessed portion 21 b as illustrated in (Fig. 1A) and is extruded from the recessed portion 21 b as illustrated in (Fig. 1B). As illustrated the rods 32 are found to be inserted into an interior of the inner mold / cavity formed by the interior mold.
Regarding claim 8 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the inner mold includes an insertion part configured such that the actuator is inserted into an interior of the inner mold when the inner mold is in the exit position.
Baba teaches the following:
([0069]) teaches that the ejector pin 34 is configured to advance and retreat in the die axis MA direction by the mechanical ejector, and hereby, the ejector plate 33 and the rods 32 advance and retreat in the die axis MA direction. In conjunction with the advance and retreat of them, the ejector ring 31 is accommodated in the recessed portion 21 b as illustrated in (Fig. 1A) and is extruded from the recessed portion 21 b as illustrated in (Fig. 1B). As illustrated the rods 32 are found to be inserted into an interior of the inner mold / cavity formed by the interior mold.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
B.) Claim(s) 6, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoichiro Baba
Regarding claim 6 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the inner mold part further includes:
a push rod connected to the inner mold; and
an actuator connected to the push rod and configured to contract or extend the push rod.
Baba teaches the following:
& b. ) ([0056]) teaches that the extrusion device 5 includes a mechanical ejector (not shown), an ejector ring 31, a plurality of rods 32, an ejector plate 33, and an ejector pin 34. Where an ejector ring 31 and a plurality of rods 32 / mechanical ejector act as applicant’s push rod and actuator connected to the push rod respectively. Highlighting, as illustrated in (Figs. 7 & 10 – 11) the ejector ring 31 and is found to be slide across / connected to the inner mold as it travels to eject the article from the mold. Highlighting, while it is understood that Baba teaches an ejector ring 31 connected to the inner mold. However, if there are perceived discrepancies regarding the ejector ring 31 connected to the inner mold, the case law for rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized by the courts that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400, MPEP 2144.
C.) Claim(s) 6, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoichiro Baba in view of Ishikawa Akira (JP 2017043080 A, hereinafter Akira)
Regarding claim 6 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the inner mold part further includes:
a push rod connected to the inner mold; and
an actuator connected to the push rod and configured to contract or extend the push rod.
Baba teaches the following:
& b. ) ([0056]) teaches that the extrusion device 5 includes a mechanical ejector (not shown), an ejector ring 31, a plurality of rods 32, an ejector plate 33, and an ejector pin 34. Where an ejector ring 31 and a plurality of rods 32 / mechanical ejector act as applicant’s push rod and actuator connected to the push rod respectively. Highlighting, as illustrated in (Figs. 7 & 10 – 11) the ejector ring 31 and is found to be slide across / connected to the inner mold as it travels to eject the article from the mold. Highlighting, while it is understood that Baba teaches an ejector ring 31 connected to the inner mold. However, if there are perceived discrepancies regarding the ejector ring 31 connected to the inner mold, the case law for rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized by the courts that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400, MPEP 2144.
Regarding Claim 6, Baba is silent on the push rod connected to the inner mold. In analogous art for an injection molding system that utilizes a stripper to remove the article from the mold, ([0076]), Akira suggests details regarding the push rod connected to the inner mold, and in this regard, Akira teaches the following:
([0076]) teaches as shown in FIG. 1, the demolding mechanism 4 has a protruding unit 40 for removing the core 20 from the molded product, and a guide unit 41 for removing the cavity 30 from the molded product. ([0077]) adding that as shown in FIG. 2, the protruding unit 40 has a stripper 400 that is disposed on the male side platen 210 (between the male side platen 210 and the female side platen 310) and is movable relative to the male side platen 210 in the Y-axis direction. Highlighting as illustrated across (Figs. 9 - 11), during demolding the protruding unit 40 in particular the stripper 400 (which is equivalent to applicant’s push rod / ejector ring 31) is found to be attached to the partition walls 300 of the cavities 30 for the inner mold.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a hollow body cylinder by injection molding resin into a die, the die including a demolding mechanism including an ejector ring 31 of Baba. By modifying the ejector ring to be attached to the partition walls of the cavities for the inner mold, as taught by Akira. Highlighting, one would be motivated to implement the ejector ring to be attached to the partition walls of the cavities for the inner mold as it provides for removing the core 20 from the molded product, ([0076]). Highlighting, that the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way and/or the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results provides for the recitation of KSR case law. Where, "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143. Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tucker et al. (US 3669598 A) – teaches in the (Abstract) a method and apparatus for molding and ejecting plastic articles having protrusions extending from a base of the article. movable blades between the core elements assure proper filling of the mold and function to eject the molded articles from the mold core section.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Andrés E. Behrens Jr. whose telephone number is (571)-272-9096. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 7:30 AM-5:30 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, Alison 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 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.
/Andrés E. Behrens Jr./Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/JaMel M Nelson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743