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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 August 5, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 21-23, 29 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 21 recites “wherein the first variegating agent is the second variegating agent” which is not originally disclosed and thus is new matter.
Claim 22 recites “wherein the first base colorant is the second base colorant “ which is not originally disclosed and thus is new matter..
Claim 23 recites “wherein the first capstock is the second capstock” which is not originally disclosed and thus is new matter.
Claim 29 recites “wherein the one or more storage vessels hold a second variegating agent, a second capstock, and a second base colorant to collectively supply to the mixer to form a second polymeric composition during or after formation of the first layer” which is not originally disclosed and thus is new matter.
Claim 31 recites “wherein the one or more storage vessels hold a second variegating agent, a second capstock, and a second base colorant to collectively supply to the mixer to form a second polymeric composition during or after formation of the first layer” which is not originally disclosed and thus is new matter.
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 10-15, 17-23 and 27-31 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.
Claim 10 recites “wherein the capstock hopper feeds the second extruder with at least a portion of the first layer during or after formation of the second polymeric composition” which is incorrect as understood by the instant specification. The Examiner suggests the following amendments: “wherein the capstock hopper feeds the second extruder with at least a portion of the first layer during or after formation of the second layer
Claim 27 recites “a capstock hopper for holding a first layer of a first polymeric composition comprising a first variegating agent, a first capstock, and a first base colorant and a capstock hopper and for supplying the second extruder” which is unclear. The Examiner suggests the following amendments: “a capstock hopper for holding a first layer of a first polymeric composition comprising a first variegating agent, a first capstock, and a first base colorant and
Claims not listed above are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
For further examination purposes, the scope of the claims are read in light of the Examiner suggested amendments.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 10-11, 13-15, 17-18 and 21-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) in view of Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491).
Cameron et al. (US5,232,751) disclose a system for manufacturing a polymer-based sheet
material (figs. 1-3; col. 2, line 17, to col. 6, lines 64; vinyl sheet), comprising:
a core extrusion assembly comprising a first extruder 20 for extruding a core composition having
a first planar surface and a second planar surface (sheet has first and second planar surfaces); and
a cap extrusion assembly comprising:
a second extruder 18 for extruding a cap composition, the second extruder having a first end
and a second end with a set of temperature zones 38, 40, 42 between the first end and the second end
of the second extruder 18, wherein the second end is more proximate an extrusion die 24 than the first
end (fig. 1), and
a capstock inlet 32 for supplying the second extruder 18 a capstock of the cap composition at the first end of the second extruder 18 (fig. 1), wherein a color feeder 36 feeds a base colorant of the cap composition to the extruder 18, and a color feeder 14 feeds a variegating agent of the cap composition to the extruder 18 (col. 2, line 16, to col. 3, line 63),
wherein a temperature of a first temperature zone of the set of temperature zones proximate
the first end is greater than a second temperature zone of the set of temperature zones, wherein the
second temperature zone is more proximate the second end (col. 3, lines 30-35; temperature within
extruder 18 is generally about 380 degrees F, although some zone-to-zone variation occur; in particular the temperature at block member 22 is closer to about 340 degrees F; as shown in fig. 1, block member
22 is adjacent the second end, and thus it would be obvious, if not inherent, that the temperature of the
second end is close to or at 340 degrees F in order for the block member 22 to be about 340 degrees F;
thus, the temperature (generally about 380 degrees F) of a first temperature zone of the set of
temperature zones proximate the first end is greater than a second temperature zone of the set of
temperature zones, wherein the second temperature zone is more proximate the second end
(temperature zone proximate the die is close to or at about 340 degrees F, as mentioned above),
wherein the temperature of the first temperature zone is at least 188°C (as mentioned above, the first
temperature zone is 380°F (193.33°C)) and the temperature of the second temperature zone is at or
below 181°C (as mentioned above, the second temperature zone is 340°F (171.11°C)). Furthermore,
alternatively, Cameron al. (US5,232,751) further discloses (col. 2, lines 41-48) that each temperature
zone contains an integral, exterior heat member capable of achieving levels in excess of 425°F
(218.33°C) and discloses (col. 3, lines 30-35) that some zone-to-zone temperature variations occur as are
well known in the art, and thus the temperature zones are capable of achieving zone-to-zone
temperature variations since each temperature zone has a separate heat member for heating the
respective temperature zone to a desired temperature. Therefore, since each temperature zone can be
separately controlled to an excess of 218.33°C, the system is capable of being operated wherein the
temperature of the first temperature zone is at least 188°C and the temperature of the second
temperature zone is at or below 181°C.
However, Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) do not disclose the capstock inlet being a hopper, wherein the capstock hopper holds a first layer of a first polymeric composition comprising a first variegating agent, a first capstock, and a first base colorant, wherein the capstock hopper holds a second layer of a second polymeric composition comprising a second variegating agent, a second capstock, and a second base colorant, and wherein the capstock hopper feeds the second extruder with at least a portion of the first layer during or after formation of the second polymeric composition.
As mentioned above, Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) disclose that the cap composition includes the variegating agent, the capstock and the base colorant. Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) further discloses that the cap composition within the extruder 18 periodically changes between a first polymeric composition and a second polymeric composition to produce random striations (color changes) in the cap composition (col. 1, lines 55-68; col. 3, line 52, to col. 4, line 4).
Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) disclose an extrusion system (fig. 1) including an extruder 5, 10 for extruding an extrusion composition, the extruder having an inlet, wherein the inlet is defined by a hopper 8, wherein the hopper 8 holds a first layer 2 of a first polymeric composition (defined by first components) of the extrusion composition, wherein the hopper 8 holds a second layer 1 of a second polymeric composition (defined by second components) of the extrusion composition. As shown in fig. 1, the hopper 8 is capable of feeding the extruder with at least a portion of the first layer 2 during or after formation of the second polymeric composition defining the second layer. The layering of the first and second polymeric compositions enables the extrusion composition to periodically change colors in the extrusion composition (col. 1, line 36, to col. 4, line 14; “layers … of different composition …for example colour” col. 4, lines 4-11; fig. 8 shows extruded product with color changes, col. 5, lines 24-32; the extruder can be used for injection or extrusion, col. 3, lines 16-19; col. 5, lines 44-54).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to modify the inlet and color feeders of Cameron et al. (US5,232,751) with a hopper, as disclosed by Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491), with a reasonable expectation of success because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for supplying an extruder to make color changes known to be operable in the art. In the combination, the variegating agent, the first capstock, and the first base colorant, which are fed into the extruder by the inlet and the color feeders in Cameron et al. (US5,232,751), would instead be fed into the extruder by the hopper; and the color changing, as desired by Cameron et al. (US5,232,751), would be enabled by the layering.
As to claim 11, Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) further disclose the core extrusion assembly
further comprises a first core inlet 46 for supplying the first extruder 20 the core composition at the first
end of the first extruder 20 (fig. 1). However, Cameron et al. (US5,232,751) do not disclose the first
core inlet being a first core hopper. Przybylinski et al. (US 2010/0159213) further disclose the system
comprising a core extrusion assembly comprising a first extruder 102 for extruding a core composition
and a first core hopper 156 for supplying the first extruder 102 the core composition (figs. 2, 3, 4A;
[0026]-[0050]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention
was made, to further modify the first core inlet of Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) with a first core
hopper, as disclosed by Przybylinski et al. (US 2010/0159213), because such a modification is known in
the art and would provide an alternative configuration for supplying an extruder known to be operable
in the art.
As to claim 13, Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) further disclose the core composition comprises a
first polymeric mixture and additives (col. 3, lines 19-30). However, Cameron et al. US 5,232,751) does
not disclose the additives including fillers. Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) further discloses that additives can include fillers (col. 2, lines 40-46). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify the additives to include fillers, as disclosed by Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the core composition known to be operable in the art.
Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) further disclose:
(Claim 14) the first polymeric mixture comprises corestock (col. 3, lines 19-30, polyvinyl chloride compound (PVC));
(Claim 15) wherein the first polymeric mixture further comprises an additive (col. 3, lines 19-30,
additives); and
(Claim 18) wherein the temperature of each temperature zone of the set of temperature zones
is in a range of 149°C and 195°C (col. 3, lines 30-35; about 340°F to generally about 380°F (about 171.1°C
to generally about 193.3°C)).
As to claim 17, Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) further disclose the set of temperature zones of
the second extruder 18 for extruding the cap composition each contain a heat member capable of
achieving temperature levels in excess of 425 °F (218°C), and thus the system is capable of extruding a
variegating agent comprises a constituent polymer with an initial melting point in a range of between
161°C to 167°C. Further, a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed
apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art
apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham,
2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987); see MPEP 2114. "Expressions relating the apparatus to
contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the
apparatus claim." Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969). Furthermore, "[i]nclusion of
material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the
claims." In re Young, 75 F.2d *>996<, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937,
136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)). See MPEP 2115. Further, Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) discloses that
the variegating agent is a colorant having a polymer base (col. 3, lines 52-63, acrylic colorants, methyl
methacrylate base for the colorant). Thus, it would have been further obvious to modify the variegating
agent to include a constituent polymer with an initial melting point in a range of between 161°C to
167°C because such a constituent polymer would have been found in finding operable polymers for the
base polymer which enable the system to operate as intended in view of the colorant base polymer
teachings of Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751).
As to claims 21-23, as mentioned above, the cap composition includes a variegating agent, a base colorant, and a capstock. In view of the combination above, a layer of the first polymeric composition would include a variegating agent, a base colorant, and a capstock. The layer of the first polymeric composition would include sublayers, wherein a first sublayer would include a first variegating agent, a second base colorant, and a second capstock, and a second layer would include a second variegating agent, a second base colorant, and a second capstock. Since the polymeric compositions in the sublayers are the same, the first variegating agent would be the second variegating agent, the first base colorant would be the second base colorant, and the first capstock would be the second capstock. Thus, such sublayers would read on the limitations of claims 21-23.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) in view of Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) as applied to claims 10-11, 13-15, 17-18 and 21-23 above, and further in view of Przybylinski et al. (US 2010/0159213).
Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) and Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) do not disclose the limitations of claim 12.
Przybylinski et al. (US 2010/0159213) disclose a system for manufacturing a polymer-based
sheet material (figs. 1-4A; [0023]-[0037]; polymer sheet material 10), comprising a cap extrusion
assembly comprising a capstock extruder 300a for extruding a cap composition, and a capstock hopper 306a for supplying the extruder 300a the cap composition; wherein the core extrusion assembly comprises a second core hopper 164 for supplying the first extruder 102 a core variegation composition to the first extruder 102 ([0050]-[0051], colors are added for appearance effects, the screw segments 116 are selected to inhibit over mixing of the colorants 194; it would be obvious, if not inherent, that less mixing (less than over mixing) would result in variations in color (variegation) from the plurality of colorants to provide the appearance effects).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify the core extrusion assembly to further include a second core hopper for supplying the first extruder a core variegation composition to the first extruder, as disclosed by Przybylinski et al. (US 2010/0159213), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the core extrusion assembly capable of appearance effects.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) in view of Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) as applied to claims 10-11, 13-15, 17-18 and 21-23 above, and further in view of Smith (US 7,534,378).
Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) and Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) do not disclose the limitations of claim 19.
Smith (US 7,534,378) discloses an extrusion system including storage vessels 21, 29 and 31 for supplying resin, colorant and other additives to a mixer 32 to form a product composition which is fed to a hopper 26 attached to an extruder 14 for feeding the product composition into the extruder. (fig. 1; col. 2, lines 33-62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify the cap extrusion assembly with a mixer, as disclosed by Smith (US 7,534,378), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the cap extrusion assembly capable of mixing the components of the composition before being fed into the hopper.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) in view of Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) as applied to claims 10-11, 13-15, 17-18 and 21-23 above, and further in view of Smith (US 7,534,378) and Brundrett (US 3,275,304).
Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) and Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) do not disclose the limitations of claim 20.
Smith (US 7,534,378) discloses an extrusion system including storage vessels 21, 29 and 31 for supplying resin, colorant and other additives to a mixer 32 to form a product composition which is fed to a hopper 26 attached to an extruder 14 for feeding the product composition into the extruder. (fig. 1; col. 2, lines 33-62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify the cap extrusion assembly with a mixer, as disclosed by Smith (US 7,534,378), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the cap extrusion assembly capable of mixing the components of the composition before being fed into the hopper.
Brundrett (US 3,275,304) discloses an extrusion system including a blending apparatus for blending extrusion components of an extrusion composition (col. 1,lines 8-15), the apparatus comprising a hopper 10 and a mixer, wherein the mixer comprises a plurality of protrusions 17-24 positioned around an inner surface of the hopper (figs. 1-3), wherein the hopper 10 holds at least a portion of the composition during mixing because mixing occurs within the hopper 10 (in other words, as shown in figs. 1-3, the hopper 10 holds and mixes the components of the composition at the same time) (col. 1,line 69, to col. 2, line 65).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify the mixer with a mixer, as recited by Brundrett (US 3,275,304), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the mixer capable of mixing the components of the composition.
Claim(s) 24-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) in view of Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) and Park (US 2005/0155690).
Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) is applied as above. However, Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) does not disclose a speed of the first extruder and a speed of the second extruder being independently adjustable, OR a capstock hopper supplying the second extruder the cap composition comprising a mixture of a variegating agent, a capstock, and a base colorant at the first end of the second extruder.
Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) is applied as above and further discloses the hopper 8 located at a first end of the extruder (fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to modify the inlet and color feeders of Cameron et al. (US5,232,751) with a hopper, as disclosed by Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491), with a reasonable expectation of success because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for supplying an extruder to make color changes known to be operable in the art. In the combination, the variegating agent, the first capstock, and the first base colorant, which are fed into the extruder by the inlet and the color feeders in Cameron et al. (US5,232,751), would instead be fed into the extruder by the hopper; and the color changing, as desired by Cameron et al. (US5,232,751), would be enabled by the layering.
Park (US 2005/0155690) discloses an extrusion system for making a multi-layer product comprising a first and second extruder connected to a die for forming the multi-layer product, the extruders supplying materials forming the layers, respectively, wherein the speed of the screws are independently adjustable (20-100rpm) to adjust the thickness of each respective layer [0134]-[0137].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify a speed of the first extruder and a speed of the second extruder to be independently adjustable, as disclosed by Park (US 2005/0155690), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the system capable of adjusting the thickness of the layers (i.e., thickness of the core and the cap).
As to claim 25, Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) further discloses the system, wherein the first extruder 20 comprises a first extrusion screw (which inherently has a speed of rotation) and the second extruder 18 comprises a second extrusion screw (which inherently has a speed of rotation) (col. 2,lines 30-32, 48-50 and 66-68). In view of the combination above, the speed of rotation of the first extrusion screw and the speed of rotation of the second extrusion screw would be independently adjustable to adjust the layer thickness.
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) in view of Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) and Park (US 2005/0155690) as applied to claims 24-25 above, and further in view of Smith (US 7,534,378).
Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751), Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) and Park (US 2005/0155690) do not disclose the limitations of claim 26.
Smith (US 7,534,378) discloses an extrusion system including storage vessels 21, 29 and 31 for supplying resin, colorant and other additives to a mixer 32 to form a product composition which is fed to a hopper 26 attached to an extruder 14 for feeding the product composition into the extruder. (fig. 1; col. 2, lines 33-62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify the system with storage vessels, as recited by Smith (US 7,534,378), because such a modification is known in the art and would enable storage of the components of the composition. As mentioned above, Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) discloses that the components of the composition include the variegating agent, the capstock, and the base colorant. Thus, in view of the combination, the storage vessels would hold each of the variegating agent, the capstock, and the base colorant to be mixed before supplying the cap composition to the second extruder.
Claim(s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) in view of Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) and Smith (US 7,534,378).
Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) is applied as above. However, Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) does not disclose a capstock hopper for holding a first layer of a first polymeric composition comprising a first variegating agent, a first capstock, and a first base colorant and for supplying the second extruder the cap composition from at least a portion of the first layer at the first end of the second extruder; OR one or more storage vessels for holding each of the first variegating agent, the first capstock, and the first base colorant to collectively supply to a mixer to form the first polymeric composition.
Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) is applied as above and further discloses the hopper 8 located at a first end of the extruder (fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to modify the inlet and color feeders of Cameron et al. (US5,232,751) with a hopper, as disclosed by Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491), with a reasonable expectation of success because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for supplying an extruder to make color changes known to be operable in the art. In the combination, the variegating agent, the first capstock, and the first base colorant, which are fed into the extruder by the inlet and the color feeders in Cameron et al. (US5,232,751), would instead be fed into the extruder by the hopper; and the color changing, as desired by Cameron et al. (US5,232,751), would be enabled by the layering.
Smith (US 7,534,378) discloses an extrusion system including storage vessels 21, 29 and 31 for holding and collectively supplying resin, colorant and other additives to a mixer 32 to form a product composition which is fed to a hopper 26 attached to an extruder 14 for feeding the product composition into the extruder. (fig. 1; col. 2, lines 33-62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify the cap extrusion assembly with storage vessels and a mixer, as disclosed by Smith (US 7,534,378), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the cap extrusion assembly capable of supplying and mixing the components of the composition before being fed into the hopper.
Claim(s) 28-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) in view of Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) and Smith (US 7,534,378) as applied to claim 27 above, and further in view of Brundrett (US 3,275,304).
Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751), Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) and Smith (US 7,534,378) do not disclose the limitations of claims 28-31
Brundrett (US 3,275,304) discloses an extrusion system including a blending apparatus for blending extrusion components of an extrusion composition (col. 1,lines 8-15), the apparatus comprising a hopper 10 comprising a mixer (i.e., a protrusion hopper), wherein the mixer comprises a plurality of protrusions 17-24 positioned around an inner surface of the hopper (figs. 1-3), wherein the components enter the hopper and strike at least one protrusion of the plurality of protrusions to form the composition having a consistently random distribution of the components (figs. 1-3; col. 1,line 69, to col. 2, line 65; col. 3, lines 29-40, the flow patterns, such as helical or “zig-zag” from the protrusions, enables a consistently random distribution of the components; Note that some of the protrusions shown in figs. 1-3 are similar to the protrusions shown in instant fig. 5C which are instantly disclosed as enabling consistent random distribution).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify the mixer and hopper with a mixer (i.e., protrusion hopper), as recited by Brundrett (US 3,275,304), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the mixer capable of mixing the components of the composition. In view of the combination, the first variegating agent, the first capstock, and the first base colorant would enter the hopper and strike at least one protrusion of the plurality of protrusions to form the first polymeric composition having a consistently random distribution of the first variegating agent, as disclosed by Brundrett (US 3,275,304); and the first layer would formed when the first polymeric composition is deposited by the mixer and reaches a bottom portion of the hopper, as disclosed by the layering teachings of Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491).
As to claim 29, as mentioned above, Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) discloses the components of the composition including a variegating agent, a capstock, and a base colorant; Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) discloses the second layer made of second components defining the second polymeric composition; Smith (US 7,534,378) discloses storage vessels for holding the components of the composition which are mixed by a mixer; and Brundrett (US 3,275,304) discloses that the mixer can be a protrusion hopper. Thus, in view of the combination, the storage vessels would hold a second variegating agent, a second capstock, and a second base colorant (i.e., the second components of the second polymeric composition) and would collectively supply them to the mixer (i.e., the protrusion hopper). In the protrusion hopper, the second components would form the second polymeric composition after being mixed by the protrusions in the protrusion hopper. Since the first and second components are sequentially introduced into the protrusion hopper, it would be further obvious that the second polymeric composition is formed during or after formation of the first layer by the first components. For example, if the sequential introduction includes immediately introducing the second components into the protrusion hopper after stopping the introduction of the first components, as the last of the first components fall still forming the first layer, the newly introduced second components fall and form the second polymeric composition (i.e., the second polymeric composition is formed during formation of the first layer); and if any second components are introduced after the first layer is finished being formed, the second polymeric composition would be formed after formation of the first layer. And in view of the combination, a second layer would be formed when the second polymeric composition is deposited by the mixer (i.e., protrusions in the protrusion hopper) and reaches the first layer of the hopper in view of the layering teachings of Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491).
As to claim 30, Smith (US 7,534,378) further discloses that the mixer 32 is positioned between the storage vessels 21, 29 and 31 and the hopper 26 (fig. 1). In view of the combination, as mentioned above, the mixer can be a protrusion hopper, and thus the mixer (i.e., the protrusions of the hopper) would be positioned between the storage vessels and the hopper (i.e., the portion of the hopper below the protrusion), wherein the mixer (i.e., the protrusions) would mix the first variegating agent,
the first capstock, and the first base colorant to form the first polymeric composition having a
consistently random distribution of the first components (including the first variegating agent), wherein the mixer (i.e., protrusions) would deposit the first polymeric composition into the hopper (i.e., the portion of the hopper below the protrusion).
As to claim 31, as mentioned above, Cameron et al. (US 5,232,751) discloses the components of the composition including a variegating agent, a capstock, and a base colorant; Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491) discloses the second layer made of second components defining the second polymeric composition; Smith (US 7,534,378) discloses storage vessels for holding the components of the composition which are mixed by a mixer; and Brundrett (US 3,275,304) discloses that the mixer can be a protrusion hopper. Thus, in view of the combination, the storage vessels would hold a second variegating agent, a second capstock, and a second base colorant (i.e., the second components of the second polymeric composition) and would collectively supply them to the mixer (i.e., the protrusion hopper). In the protrusion hopper, the second components would form the second polymeric composition after being mixed by the protrusions in the protrusion hopper. Since the first and second components are sequentially introduced into the protrusion hopper, it would be further obvious that the second polymeric composition is formed during or after formation of the first layer by the first components. For example, if the sequential introduction includes immediately introducing the second components into the protrusion hopper after stopping the introduction of the first components, as the last of the first components fall still forming the first layer, the newly introduced second components fall and form the second polymeric composition (i.e., the second polymeric composition is formed during formation of the first layer); and if any second components are introduced after the first layer is finished being formed, the second polymeric composition would be formed after formation of the first layer. And in view of the combination, a second layer would be formed by depositing the second polymeric composition in the hopper in view of the layering teachings of Kilim et al. (US 6,287,491).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 5, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that support for the new claims is found in the specification [0048-49] and [0059]. However, these paragraphs do not disclose the claim recitations rejected as new matter above.
Applicant argues that Cameron et al. and Przybylinski et al., individually and in combination, fail to teach, suggest, or describe having at least a capstock hopper holding a first layer of a first polymeric composition comprising a first variegating agent, a first capstock, and a first base colorant and holding a second layer of a second polymeric composition comprising a second variegating agent, a second capstock, and a second base colorant, and wherein the capstock hopper feeds the second extruder with at least a portion of the first layer during or after formation of the second polymeric composition.
The Examiner agrees. However, such new limitations are read upon by the newly cited prior art in the prior art rejections above
Applicants argue the newly added claims relative to the previously cited art.
However, such arguments are moot in view of the newly cited art and the new prior art rejections of the newly added claims above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH S LEYSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5061. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:30pm.
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 Xiao Zhao can be reached at 5712705343. 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.
/J.S.L/Examiner, Art Unit 1744
/John J DeRusso/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights