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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to for insufficient antecedent basis for “the influence” and “the desired.” Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments
35 USC 103:
Applicant’s arguments directed to the instant amendment have been considered and persuasive; however, a new ground of rejection is applied addressing the mapping limitations. In particular, the applied prior art teaches a thin film production model relating the selected materials under different processing conditions to predicted thin film properties. The implementation of the model provides an optimal means for selecting materials having been identified to produce target thin film properties under multiple processing conditions.
35 USC 101:
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not persuasive. The combination of limitations are directed to mental processes encompassing grouping, forming correlations, detecting a selection, and calculating a production parameter in light of insignificant extra-solution activity including at least outputting, displaying, or transferring. The combination of limitations are not meaningfully limited so as to provide a practical application of the abstract idea. While Applicant has discussed numerous advantages, pages 7-8, Applicant’s arguments, the claim limitations provide a production parameters for either display or for communication via a data connection. Moreover, the claim limitations do not exclude a human operator from performing each of these tasks or reflect an automated sequence described by Applicant, pages 7-8, Applicant’s arguments.
* It is suggested to provide a practical application of the abstract idea via the equivalent of controlling a film extrusion machine to produce the plastic film using the calculated production parameters based on the thin film production model.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claim(s) recite(s) a mental process encompassing steps of detecting, grouping, forming correlations, and calculating described below.
detecting raw material parameters relating to properties of the raw materials (claims 1, 2,5)
grouping the raw material parameter into at least two raw material parameter groups (claim 1)
forming correlations between raw material parameter groups (claim 1)
forming correlations between film parameters and the raw material parameter groups based on a film production model, by mapping the influence of the materials to the desired properties (claim 1) detecting a selection of at least one raw material from at least one raw material parameter group, calculating at least one production parameter of the film extrusion machine based on the film production model (claim 1)
Claims 2, 4, and 5 further recite mental processes including detecting, weighing, and detecting production parameters.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the capturing and outputting represent insignificant extra solution activity described below
capturing film parameters relating to desired properties of the plastic film AND outputting the production parameter of the film extrusion machine (claims 1, 3), MPEP 2106.05(g). The additional limitation of a film production model, plastic film, raw materials, properties, and film extrusion machine are generally described so as to link the abstract to the field of production (claims 1)., MPEP 2106.05(h). The computer represents mere instructions to apply the abstract idea (claim 6) , MPEP 2106.05(f). Additionally, displaying and transferring data represent insignificant extra-solution activity, MPEP 2106.05(G)
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the processor represents mere instructions to apply the abstract idea while the insignificant extra solution activity is well understood, conventional, and routine, see MPEP 2106.05(d).
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheetham et al. (PG/PUB 20040068339) in view over Ederleh et al. (PG/PUB WO2021073999A1) in view over Maseeh (USPN 6157900).
Claim 1.
Cheetham et al. teaches a method but does not expressly teach the plastic film, film properties, film materials, film model, and extrusion limitations described below. Ederleh et al. teaches the plastic film, film properties, film materials, film model, and extrusion limitations described below as well as producing a plastic film from a total of raw materials with a film extrusion machine, comprising the following steps:
capturing film parameters relating to desired properties of the plastic film (Cheetham et al., ABSTRACT, Figure 1-10, 20, 40, 50 e.g. see capturing material properties corresponding to material selections, see Ederleh et al., for properties including film barrier, stability, color, etc., page 5/11, 2nd para.)
detecting raw material parameters relating to properties of the raw materials (Cheetham et al., , Figure 1-70, 80, 90, 120 e.g. see matching raw materials to desired properties, see Ederleh et al. for multiple raw materials, page 2/11 (2nd para.), 4/11 (4th para.), 6/11 2nd para. )
grouping the raw material parameter into at least two raw material parameter groups (Cheetham et al., Figure 1-100-130 e.g. see as identifying matching materials as reading on grouping of materials, see Ederleh et al. for multiple raw materials, page 6/11)
forming correlations between raw material parameter groups (Cheetham et al., Figure 1-120 e.g. see sorting and weighting as reading on forming correlations between material parameter groups)
forming correlations between film parameters and the raw material parameter groups based on a film production model (Ederleh et al., see modelling relationship between film materials and film properties, ABSTRACT, page 3/11, page 6/11, Figures 3-4 see modelling a relationship between input parameters (film materials) and output parameters (film properties), see material groups of Cheetham.
detecting a selection of at least one raw material from at least one raw material parameter group (Cheetham et al., 0006-0008 e.g. see selecting raw materials based upon output results, Figure 1, see Ederleh et al. for material selection, page 2/11, page 6/11)
calculating at least one production parameter of the film extrusion machine based on the film production model (Ederleh, ABSTRACT , page 3/11, page 6/11, Figures 3-4 e.g. see determining extrusion machine settings for achieving film property based on production model, see output parameters of production model)
outputting the production parameter of the film extrusion machine (Ederleh et al., ABSTRACT, page 2/11, 5/11, 6/11 e.g. see applying settings for control and regulation of the film extrusion system)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention applying the teachings of Ederleh et al., namely controlling film extrusion based on a film production model correlating the relationships between film materials and properties, to the teachings of Cheetham et al., namely determining relationships between material groups and material parameters, and selecting materials for achieving target properties, would achieve an expected and predictable result of selecting optimal groups of materials for achieving the target properties for film manufacturing. Ederleh et al. is reasonably pertinent to a problem of identifying optimal materials for achieving material properties using optimization with a benefit of reducing energy demand during production as described, page 4/11)
The combination does not expressly teach:
by at least mapping the influence of the materials to the desired properties of the plastic film; displaying the production parameter to the machine operator; or transferring the production parameter to the film extrusion machine via a data connection.
Maseeh teaches by at least mapping the influence of the materials to the desired properties of the plastic film for forming correlations between film parameters and the raw material parameters groups based on a film production model (e.g. see mapping the influence of materials under various processing conditions to predict thin film parameters ABSTRACT, “In particular the invention relates to materials research and manufacturing, specifically on modeling thin films on semiconductor materials and other material fabrication processes that depend on several parameters. However the system and method disclosed herein are suitable for creating a model and providing an estimate of the physical properties of materials undergoing other material fabrication processes that are dependent on several parameters.,” see also Col 4 lines 60-67 thru. Col 5 lines 1-67 “The Operator of the invention selects a material and fabrication process and enters a set parameters for the operation of the fabrication process. The invention returns estimates of property values that would result if a list of Operator-specified parameter values was used in fabricating and operating the selected material. The estimate is based on multidimensional interpolation, extrapolation and weighted averaging of data in an embedded database. A determination of the associated error is returned along with the estimate.”
displaying the production parameter to the machine operator (e.g. “The Operator of the invention selects a material and fabrication process and enters a set parameters for the operation of the fabrication process.”) OR
transferring the production parameter to the film extrusion machine via a data connection
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention applying the teachings of Maseeh, namely mapping the relationship between selected materials and associated influences to the desired properties of a thin film process, to the teachings of Cheetham, as modified, namely employing a thin film production model correlating input and output parameters, would achieve an expected and predictable result via forming the correlations based on mapping/simulating the relationship between materials subjected to manufacturing parameters and their associated target property responses. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to provide “he system and method disclosed herein are suitable for creating a model and providing an estimate of the physical properties of materials undergoing other material fabrication processes that are dependent on several parameters,” as described.
Claim 2.
The method according to claim 1 comprising the following step: detecting a level of detail for the raw material parameter groups (Cheetham Figure 1 e.g. see sorting as detecting a level of detail)
Claim 3.
The method according to claim 1, additionally comprising the following step:
outputting selection suggestions for selecting raw materials (Cheetham et al., Figure 1- 130)
Claim 4.
The method according to claim 1, additionally comprising the following step:
weighting raw material parameter groups (Cheetham, Figure 1-120 e.g. see sorting as weighting, see also Table 1, 0006-0009, 0035-0040)
Claim 5.
The method according to claim 1, additionally comprising the following step:
detecting production parameter ranges of at least one film production machine (Cheetham, Table 1, 0006-0009, 0035-0040, see Ederleh for production parameter ranges e.g. “. If the lower limit for this non-prioritized model parameter is now set during optimization in the form of the thickness of the film, it is ensured that the variation of this non-prioritized model parameter does not leave the stable production range. This default can be given in a manual way, but also by the production model itself. In addition to the change limit, which can of course also be designed as a change corridor, the direction of change can also provide that only an increase or decrease of the non-prioritized model parameter to be changed directs or limits the optimization in the desired way.”)
Claim 6.
A non-transitory computer readable medium including instructions that when executed on a computer, cause the computer to carry out the steps of a method according to claim 1 (Cheetham, 0004-0005)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Claim 1 relevancy
201903150371 – directed to modelling thin film properties
WO2018072773 The invention relates to various aspects in the production of extrusion products. The properties of extruded articles are dependent significantly, in addition to their formulation, also on the setting variables and in particular on the thus resulting process variables. The setting variables and in particular the process variables thus represent a state of the extrusion process characterized as “fingerprint”. The thus claimed invention takes into account these facts and supports the operator of a production plant to detect earlier changes in quality and to systematically counteract a deterioration in the quality.
20190315037 - The invention relates to the determination of the optical quality of a film. On the one hand, a correlation of the obtained measured values with the production parameters, which are detected in a time-synchronous manner at the extrusion plant, is carried out. On the other hand, a correlation of said obtained measurement data with the geometric and/or functional properties of a film, for example the water vapor permeability, is carried out. The obtained correlation of data is used in the process for controlling the running production process of the film to an optimum operating point. Consequently, the resulting functional properties of a film are improved in an automated manner and met according to the desired specifications. The operator can predetermine which geometric and/or functional properties of a film are accepted as a control variable.
20190232543 - Thus, for example, the first temperature can be processed directly and, in particular, a probable value or a probable characteristic of the property relevant for the further processing of the film material can be calculated or modelled via a mathematical relationship and/or a model between the first temperature and the property relevant for the further processing of the film material, 0017
20240338014 – selecting materials of components of a product to be manufactured
Misc., claim 1 relevancy
20260044906 20230145099 20210374295 11004037 20200401113 20040083083
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARRIN D DUNN whose telephone number is (571)270-1645. The examiner can normally be reached M-Sat (10-8) PST.
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, Robert Fennema can be reached at 571-272-2748. 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.
/DARRIN D DUNN/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights