DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The instant specification includes unconventional section headings, such as: TECHNICAL FIELD, BACKGROUND ART, CITATION LIST, SUMMARY OF INVENTION, Technical Problem, Solution to Problem, Advantageous Effects of Invention, DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS, REFERENCE SIGNS LIST
Appropriate correction is required.
The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, it may be omitted or the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
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.
(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.
Claims 1-2, and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Maeyama et al. (WO 2021095823 A1 citations based on English equivalent US 2022/0250285 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Maeyama discloses a method for producing a resin molded product (title/abstract; ¶¶ 111+), comprising:
conveying a molding die maintenance member including a plate-like support and a molding die maintenance resin placed on both surfaces of the support (¶¶ 48+), from a common storage for the molding die maintenance member and a substrate, to a molding die for resin molding including an upper die and a lower die, by a conveying mechanism (¶¶ 54, 113; FIG. 12);
clamping the molding die in a state where the molding die maintenance member is placed between the upper die and the lower die of the molding die (¶¶ 120+);
performing maintenance by heating the molding die maintenance member after the clamping the molding die (¶¶ 120+);
conveying the molding die maintenance member from the molding die by the conveying mechanism;
conveying the substrate from the storage to the molding die by the conveying mechanism, and clamping the molding die in a state where the substrate is placed between the upper die and the lower die of the molding die (¶¶ 133+).
Regarding claim 2, Maeyama discloses the support is subjected to treatment for improving joint strength to the molding die maintenance resin (¶¶ 55+).
Regarding claim 6, Maeyama discloses the molding die maintenance resin is a cleaning resin (¶¶ 55+).
Regarding claim 7, Maeyama discloses the molding die maintenance resin is a releasability recovering resin (¶ 3).
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeyama et al. (WO 2021095823 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Hiromitsu et al. (US 2007/0167097 A1).
Maeyama does not appear to expressly disclose adhesives.
However, Hiromitsu discloses similar mold cleaning sheets (title/abstract) which can be coated with adhesive (¶¶ 40+).
At the time of invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the cleaning sheet of Maeyama to include the adhesive of Hiromitsu, in order to improve the adhesion of the cleaning resin to the substrate (Hiromitsu ¶¶ 40+).
Claim 4 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeyama et al. (WO 2021095823 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Takashima (EP 1813406 A1)
Maeyama does not appear to expressly disclose roughening the substrate.
However, Takashima discloses a similar mold cleaning sheet has a rough surface (¶¶ 17-20)..
At the time of invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the sheet of Maeyama would include the rough surfaces of Takashima, because the substrate materials are substantially the same and such rough surface would improve adhesion of the cleaning resin.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art taken either singularly or in combination fails to anticipate or fairly suggest the limitations of the independent claims, in such a manner that a rejection under 35 U.S.C. §102 or §103 would be proper. Specifically, although the closest prior art to Takashima suggests that the cleaning substrates can be embossed, porous or perforated (¶¶ 19-20, 70) the prior art does not teach or suggest “a diameter of a part inside the recessed part is larger than a diameter of an opening of the recessed part” as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Benjamin A Schiffman whose telephone number is (571)270-7626. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-530p EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christina Johnson can be reached at (571)272-1176. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BENJAMIN A SCHIFFMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742