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
Acknowledgment is made of the applicant's priority claim to the Italian application # IT102021000012026. The priority dates for all of the claims within this application are as follows:
05/11/2021
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/31/2023 has been considered by the examiner.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamasaki (EP0410558A2), in view of Amedee (US3300811A).
Yamasaki teaches a centrifugation station of extrusion plants comprising {Col. 1 Lines 1-6, Col. 4 Lines 22-23}: a tubular body {Col. 2 Lines 16-17} internally defining a processing duct {Col. 2 Lines 15-21} extending along a central axis {Col. 2 Lines 15-16} between a supply section defining an inlet of material to be extruded in molten form and a concurrent release section defining an outlet nozzle of said material to be extruded {Col. Lines 18-21, Col. 4 Lines 22-23}; a shaft having an upper portion extending in said supply section {Col. 2 Lines 16-17, 22-23} and a threaded lower portion defining an endless screw extending in said release section {Col. 2 Lines 20-23} and configured to promote the exit of material from the outlet nozzle {Col. 2 Lines 33-35, Col. 4 Lines 21-23}; an impeller fitted around the upper portion of the shaft {Col. 2 Lines 26-30}, said impeller being provided with a plurality of blades angularly spaced from each other {Col. 3 Lines 29-31} and shaped to distribute the molten material to be extruded on an inner wall of the supply duct {Col. 2 Lines 28-30} favoring the extraction of any volatile compounds from the material to be extruded {Col. 4 Lines 6-12}. Yamasaki teaches an actuator unit {Col. 3 Lines 20-21, 36-37} configured to rotate the impeller and the shaft at different rotation speeds {Col. 4 Lines 35-38}. Yamasaki teaches each blade of the impeller extends between a radially inner portion, proximal to the central axis, and a radially outer portion, proximal to the inner wall of the processing duct {Col. 2 Lines 26-29}; said impeller being shaped so that the volume contained between two adjacent blades and the inner wall portion interposed therebetween is substantially free, except for a layer of material to be extruded spread on said inner wall {Col. 2 Lines 26-29, Fig. 2}. Yamasaki teaches the upper portion of the shaft and the impeller extend along at least one stretch of the connecting section {Col. 3 Lines 18-19}. Yamasaki teaches the impeller has: a first portion extending entirely in the supply section {Col. 3 Lines 22-25}; a second portion extending at least partly in the connecting section {Col. 3 Lines 29-31}; wherein the blades of the second portion have a different shape and/or size with respect to the blades of the first portion {Col. 3 Lines 22-31}. Yamasaki teaches a thermo-regulating means {Col. 2 Lines 31-32} coupled to the tubular body and active at least on the supply section to regulate a temperature of the material to be extruded {Col. 3 Lines 6-10}. Yamasaki teaches a tubular body and said impeller at least partly define a thin-film evaporator {Col. 2 Lines 25-30}. Yamasaki teaches one suction unit {Coo. 2 Lines 52-54} configured to suck said volatile compounds from the processing duct {Col. 2 Lines 31-32, Cols. 2-3 Lines 52-1}.
Yamasaki does not teach that the impeller is rotatable around said central axis independently of the shaft.
However, Amedee teaches that the impeller is rotatable around said central axis independently of the shaft {Col. 3 Lines 50-56}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the attachment mechanism of the impeller of Amedee with the invention of Yamasaki because both inventions appear within the same field of endeavor: an extrusion system for heating, mixing, degassing, and extruding material. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine these inventions because the reduction in drive shafts through the use of journal bearings. Amedee utilizes bearings to allow the impeller to be journalled around the one, single shaft, which allows it to rotate independently; opposed to Yamasaki which has an upper and lower shaft.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combined invention of Yamasaki (EP0410558A2) and Amedee (US3300811A), in further in view of Silvi (WO0146299A2) and Sawaya (JPWO2019163637A1). *Note all teachings and mapping from Sawaya are based on the attached machine, English translation.
The combined invention of Yamasaki and Amedee teach all of the limitations of claims 1-2 and 4-10; as described in the prior 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection.
They do not teach that the actuator unit is configured to move the impeller with a rotation speed between 100 and 500 rpm and to move the shaft with a rotation speed between 8-100 rpm.
However, Silvi teaches an impeller that rotates between 100-500 rpm {Pg. 11 Lines 15-17}, and Sawaya teaches a shaft with a rotation speed of 8-100 rpm {Pg. 16 ¶ 4}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine machine parameters taught by Silvi and Sawaya to the combined invention of Yamasaki and Amedee because the inventions of Silvi and Sawaya both appear in the same field of endeavor as the combined invention of Yamasaki and Amedee: processing molten material, specifically plastic in this scenario, to be extruded at the end of the system. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine these inventions together because Yamasaki and Amedee don’t disclose specific parameters for their inventions, and given all of these inventions are in the same field of endeavor, the disclosed parameters are assumed to work with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combined invention of Yamasaki (EP0410558A2) and Amedee (US3300811A), in further in view of Ackermann (US20160145404A1).
The combined invention of Yamasaki and Amedee teach all of the limitations of claims 1-2 and 4-10; as described in the prior 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection. Yamasaki further teaches at least one outlet station configured to convey the molten or softened material to be extruded to further processing processes {Col. 3 Lines 9-10, Col. 4 Lines 21-23}; the centrifugation system interposed between the supply station and the outlet station {Fig. 2 between refs. (52) & (56)}.
Yamasaki does not teach at least one supply station configured to receive a material to be extruded in loose form and to heat it above a predetermined melting or softening temperature.
However, Ackermann teaches at least one supply station configured to receive a material to be extruded in loose form {¶ 86} and to heat it above a predetermined melting or softening temperature {¶ 86}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Ackermann with the combined invention of Yamasaki and Amedee because these inventions all appear within the same field of endeavor, involving the processing of molten plastic, degassing volatile components, and extruding said material. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine these inventions as the addition of Ackermann to the combined invention of Yamasaki and Amedee removed the need for pre-processing of plastic material, as Yamasaki needed a liquid input to function, while Ackermann can use pellets or powder forms of material creating a more efficient system through the combination of processing equipment.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CONNOR J ROTONDI whose telephone number is (571)272-2058. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am-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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at (571) 270-3240. 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.
/CONNOR J ROTONDI/Examiner, Art Unit 1779
/Bobby Ramdhanie/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1779