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 .
Status of Claims and Application
This final action on the merits is in response to the remarks and amendments to the claims received by the office 07 August 2026. Claims 13-15, 17-28 are pending. Claims 18-24 are withdrawn as non-elected. Claim 13 is amended. Claim 16 is cancelled. Claims 25-28 are newly added.
Response to Amendment
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 13, 14, 15, 17, 25, 26 and 28 and is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent 6,059,558 to Buzzell et al. (‘558 hereafter).
Regarding claim 13, ‘558 teaches a tool insert for the production of an object by an injection molding method, the tool insert comprising: an insert frame (Fig. 3 items 32); and at least one lamination assembly having a plurality of individual laminations, the at least one lamination assembly inserted in the insert frame (Fig 3 items 24 and 26), at least one curved surface introducible into the object in that the insert frame has a curved surface or at least one distortion cushion arranged between the insert frame and the at least one lamination assembly (Fig. 3 items 20) wherein the curved surface of the insert frame is arranged so that the individual laminations of the at least one lamination assembly butt against the curved surface of the insert frame and thus replicate the curved surface of the insert frame, in order to transmit the curved surface to the object (insofar as the curved surface limitation is expressed as an alternative – a curved surface or a distortion cushion. The applied prior art teaches the distortion cushion alternative and need not reach further limitations to the curved surface).
Regarding claim 14, ‘558 teaches the tool insert wherein the individual laminations of the lamination assembly have different functionalities imparted by a different microstructuring of the individual laminations (Fig 3 items 24 and 26 – examiner’s note: items 24 and 26 are shaped so as for form the right half or left haft of an article).
Regarding claim 15, ‘558 teaches the tool insert wherein differently structured individual laminations are arranged in alternating fashion within the at least one lamination assembly of the tool insert (Fig 3 items 24 and 26).
Regarding claim 17, ‘558 teaches the tool insert wherein the distortion cushion is present and designed to counter any distortions (Figs. 1 and 3 items 20, C4L49-C4L57).
Regarding claim 25, ‘558 teaches the tool insert wherein the plurality of laminations butt against each other (Fig 1 items 18).
Regarding claim 26, ‘558 teaches the tool insert wherein the plurality of laminations each have a curve concave with respect to the curved surface (insofar as the curved surface limitation is expressed as an alternative – a curved surface or a distortion cushion. The applied prior art teaches the distortion cushion alternative and need not reach further limitations to the curved surface. Nevertheless, the ‘558 reference teaches lamination elements including concavities in the form of the mold cavities for forming the hook portions of hook-and-loop fasteners).
Regarding claim 28, ‘558 teaches the tool insert wherein the plurality of laminations each are curved (Fig 3A items 18, specifically the cavites 30 comprise curved surfaces).
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:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘558 as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0090623 to Görich et al. (‘623 hereafter).
Regarding claim 27, ‘558 does not teach curved lamellae with respect to another structural element. In the same field of endeavor, molding, ‘623 teaches the tool insert wherein the plurality of laminations each have a curve convex with respect to a sliding element for contacting an outer surface of an outermost of the plurality of laminations (Fig. 9 items 550 and 530) for the benefit of molding articles with a desired shape. It would have been obvious to one possessed of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to combine the teachings of ‘558 with those of ‘623 for the benefit of molding articles to a desired shape.
Response to Arguments
In support of the patentability of the instant claims, applicant has argued that the previously applied prior art does not teach the newly amended independent claim 13. Examiner disagrees. The rejection of claim 13 above has been modified to better explain examiner’s reasoning.
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 John P Robitaille whose telephone number is (571)270-7006. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-6:00PM.
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.
/JPR/Examiner, Art Unit 1743
/GALEN H HAUTH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights