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 Group I, claims 1-18 in the reply filed on 11/02/2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-18 are objected to because of the following informalities: although UHMW has been widely used, it is recommended that every abbreviation used in claims be defined the first time it is used to ensure clarity.
Claim 9 seems to have combined two different claims into one. Clarification and/or correction are needed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kikuchi et al. (2002/0017742).
Regarding claims 1-2, Kikuchi et al. discloses an apparatus for manufacturing molded products, comprising:
a supply station 12;
a female mold 11;
a compression heating station 13 for heating the female mold 11 and a corresponding heating male mold 16;
a cooling station 14 for cooling the female mold 11 and a corresponding cooling male mold 19;
an intermittent transfer device 15 for intermittently transferring the female mold 11 through the supply station 12, the heating station 13 and the cooling station 14 in a sequential order, [0023].
Regarding to the molding material, although molding material cannot be used to determined apparatus of apparatus claims, Kikuchi et al. further discloses that a plurality of different materials can be used, such as a material comprising scraps of waste plastics products and used paper chips or burr and the like, a mixture comprising scraps of waste plastics products and an aggregate which contains sands, small pebbles, crushed cement concrete, etc.; a mixture comprising said mixture and used tire chips; and a mixture comprising said mixture and used paper chips, which included or capable of using UHMW material, [0025].
Regarding claims 4-6, Kikuchi et al. further discloses that there are multiple of heat pressing stations 13a and a plurality of cool pressing station 14a – See Fig. 1 & 7.
Regarding claim 8, wherein the mold is capable of compress the material within a predetermined time depending on the molding conditions and the material being used.
Claim 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gemberling (2005/0040552).
Regarding claim 16, Gemberling discloses an apparatus for compression molding graphite plates, comprising a base, a movable table 12, a target area 14, upper mold core member 22, lower mold cavity member 24, a movable hopper device 42 arranged to reciprocating across the target area 14, wherein the hopper device 42 comprises a hopper support platform 46 and a gear mechanism 48 for moving the hopper back and forth across the target area on tracks 50 and feed the material onto the mold cavity 24 – Fig. 5B.
Regarding claims 17-18, Gemberling further discloses a door 90 under the target area 14, 14’ selectively opening and closing – or blocking and unblocking the door 90 by motors, hydraulics, air cylinders, manual operation, or other equivalent means 92 affixed to the moveable table 12 and connected to the door 90 at the connecting block 94, [0035].
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi et al. (2002/0017742) as applied to claims 1-2, 4-6 and 8 above, and further in view of Matsuzuki et al. (2018/0200923).
Regarding claim 3, Kikuchi et al. discloses a mold transfer device as described above, but fails to disclose a shuttle elevator for raising the shutter and the mold to different elevations.
Matsuzuki et al. discloses a molding apparatus, comprising a conveyance unit 70, 80, 90 configured to move the plurality of mold assemblies 20 each of which is arranged on a plate provided in each of the heating unit 30, the pressing unit 40, and the cooling unit 50, 60 to thereby convey the mold assemblies in sequence, wherein the conveyance unit 80 includes a carry-in plate 81 configured to move the mold assemblies 20 upwardly and downwardly by the elevation mechanism section 83, [0072].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Kikuchi et al. with an elevation mechanism as taught by Matsuzuki et al. in order to move the molds up and down at every station to accommodate different elevations of the male molds.
Claims 7, 9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi et al. (2002/0017742) as applied to claims 1-2, 4-6 and 8 above, and further in view of Korb et al. (4,676,944).
Regarding claims 7 and 13, Kikuchi et al. fails to disclose that the heated mold has an air poppet valve. Korb et al discloses a molding apparatus, wherein the mold includes a number of air poppet valves on the surface of the mold (col. 3, lines 46-49). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Kikuchi et al. with a plurality of air poppet valves on the surface as taught by Korb et al. to assist with product separation from the mold surface.
Regarding claim 9, Kikuchi et al. fails to discloses that the mold is made of steel. Korb et al. further comprises that the mold comprises a flat, rigid steel plate – claim 1. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Kikuchi et al. with a mold surface made of steel as taught by Korb et al. for its resistance against wear and tear, and would therefore forming product having a uniform thickness or a uniform surface thickness.
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi et al. (2002/0017742) as applied to claims 1-2, 4-6 and 8 above, and further in view of Gemberling (2005/0040552).
Kikuchi et al. discloses a molding apparatus as described above, but fails to disclose slide dump assembly having a bed that holds moldable material granules and that slides over the female mold and a gate that can be opened or close to regulate the feeding material.
Gemberling discloses an apparatus for compression molding graphite plates, comprising a base, a movable table 12, a target area 14, upper mold core member 22, lower mold cavity member 24, a movable hopper device 42 arranged to reciprocating across the target area 14, wherein the hopper device 42 comprises a hopper support platform 46 and a gear mechanism 48 for moving the hopper back and forth across the target area on tracks 50 and feed the material onto the mold cavity 24 – Fig. 5B. Gemberling further discloses a door 90 under the target area 14, 14’ selectively opening and closing – or blocking and unblocking the door 90 by motors, hydraulics, air cylinders, manual operation, or other equivalent means 92 affixed to the moveable table 12 and connected to the door 90 at the connecting block 94, [0035].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Kikuchi et al. with an openable/closable movable feeding hopper having a slide dump over the mold cavity as taught by Gemberling in order to accurately and evenly distribute material into the mold.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Thu-Khanh T. Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)272-1136. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-4:30.
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, Galen Hauth can be reached at 571-270-5516. 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.
/Thu Khanh T. Nguyen/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743