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 of claims 1-7 in the reply filed on 10/03/2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4 and 6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 4, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 6 recites the limitation a respective inner chamber in air communication with said inner cavity-through a respective first mouth and with an outer environment through at least one respective second mouth; - a respective shutter movable between a respective open position, in which let free said respective first mouth for putting said inner cavity - in air communication with the outer environment, and a respective close position, in which closes said respective first mouth for preventing said air communication;- a respective actuator for alternately moving said respective shutter between the respective open position and the respective close position; - a further main body which defines said respective inner chamber; and - a respective cooling conduit that passes through said further main body, said respective cooling conduit not being in air communication with said respective inner chamber, and wherein, during said cooling the main body. It is unclear if claim 6 is referring to a new inner chamber, inner cavity, a first mouth, second mouth, a further main body and a cooling conduit. Examiner is interpreting it as referring back to the structures recited in claim 1.
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:
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) 1-3 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Persico (US20070166424 A1) in view of Ducret (FR2996488 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Perisico discloses rotational moulding process for producing an article ( title: "rotational
pressing', the process comprising:
- providing a mould (para. [0009]: "rotational die 10'') comprising: a main body ( "die 111" in fig. 1) which defines an inner cavity having a conformation surface counter-shaped to said article, and a venting device ( "breather device 112") fixed to said main body ( 111) and comprising: an inner chamber (see annotated figure 1)in air communication with said inner cavity through a first mouth ( see annotated figure below) through at least a second mouth ( "external passage 21 '); -a shutter ( 13) movable between an open position, in which let free said first mouth for putting said inner cavity in air communication with the outer
environment, and a close position, in which closes said first mouth for preventing said air communication; an actuator ( [0023]) for alternately moving said shutter between the open position and the close position ([0023]), the process further comprising:
- inserting a fluid form polymeric material into said inner cavity (para. [00041);
- closing said main body and rotating said mould (implicit);
- while keeping the mould in rotation and with said shutter in the close position,
heating said main body until reaching a first temperature (para. [00041);
- while keeping the mould in rotation, heating said main body until reaching a
second temperature higher than said first temperature (para. [0022, 00231);
- cooling said main body and extracting said article (para. [00241).
Perisco’s does not explicitly disclose the process further comprises subtracting heat from said shutter for maintaining said shutter at a respective temperature lower than said first temperature. Analogous mold art, Ducret, discloses using a shutter 65 for pressurization (pg. 6 paragraph 3 and 4). Although Ducret uses a shutter for suctioning, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985). Further, pressure and temperature are related through PV=nRT (ideal gas). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated a process further comprises subtracting heat from said shutter for maintaining said shutter as a respective temperature lower than said first temperature as taught by Ducret into the process taught by Periscos to ensure pressurization.
PNG
media_image1.png
688
465
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Perisco teaches wherein said inner chamber is in air communication with the outer environment also through a third mouth arranged at opposite side of said inner chamber with respect to said shutter, wherein said subtracting heat from said shutter comprises generating an air flow which from the outer environment reaches a surface of said shutter facing away from said inner cavity, and then returns to the outer environment, and wherein said air flow goes form said third mouth to said surface of said shutter, then to said inner chamber and finally to said outer environment through said at least one second mouth (see annotated figure 2).
Regarding claim 3, Perisco teaches wherein said venting device comprises: a respective main body (119) which defines said inner chamber (see figure 2) but does not explicitly disclose a cooling conduit which pass through said respective main body, said cooling conduit not being in air communication with said inner chamber wherein, during said heating said main body until reaching the second temperature and during said cooling said main body, the process comprises cooling said respective main body of the venting device for maintaining said respective main body at a respective temperature lower than said first temperature through a further air flow which from the outer environment passes through said cooling conduit for returning to the outer environment. However, Ducret discloses a cooling device (19) adapted to cool the molded parts (claim 1) and a venting device (25) for maintaining said respective main body at a respective temperature lower than said first temperature through a further air flow which from the outer environment passes through said cooling conduit for returning to the outer environment (see figure 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated a cooling device as taught by Ducret into the process taught by Perisco in order too cool the mold.
Regarding claim 5, Perisco does not explicitly disclose wherein during said heating said main body until reaching said second temperature and during said cooling said main body said shutter is in the open position but it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art for the shutter to remain in the open position given the limited number of options: either the shutter is open or close. MPEP 2144.05 says obvious to try is a prima facie evidence of obviousness.
Regarding claim 6, Perisco discloses wherein said mould comprises a further venting device fixed to said main body (see annotated figure) and comprising: a respective inner chamber in air communication with said inner cavity through a respective first mouth and with an outer environment through at least one respective second mouth (see annotated figure); a respective shutter (113) movable between a respective open position ( the shutter can have only two positions: open or close. MPEP 2144.04 states prima facie obvious to try given the limited number of options: open or close),
in which let free said respective first mouth for putting said inner cavity in air communication with the outer environment, and a respective close position in which closes said respective first mouth for preventing said air communication (shutters open and close);
a respective actuator for alternately moving said respective shutter between the respective open position and the respective close position [0023];
a further main body which defines said respective inner chamber (see annotated figure);
and a respective cooling conduit that passes through said further main body, said respective cooling conduit not being in air communication with said respective inner chamber, and wherein, during said cooling the main body, the process comprises: cooling said further main body of the further venting device through a respective air flow that from the outer environment passes through said respective cooling conduit for returning to the outer environment; interrupting said cooling of said respective main body of the venting device. Perisco does not explicitly disclose a respective cooling conduit that passes through said further main body, said respective cooling conduit not being in air communication with said respective inner chamber and the process comprising cooling said further main body of the further venting device through a respective air flow that from the outer environment passes through said respective cooling conduit for returning to the outer environment; interrupting said cooling of said respective main body of the venting device.
However, Ducret discloses a cooling device (19) adapted to cool the molded parts (claim 1) and a venting device (25) for maintaining said respective main body at a respective temperature lower than said first temperature through a further air flow which from the outer environment passes through said cooling conduit for returning to the outer environment (see figure 1). Therefore it would have bene obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated disclose a respective cooling conduit that passes through said further main body, said respective cooling conduit not being in air communication with said respective inner chamber and the process comprising cooling said further main body of the further venting device through a respective air flow that from the outer environment passes through said respective cooling conduit for returning to the outer environment, interrupting said cooling of said respective main body of the venting device in order to cool the mold pieces.
Claim(s) 4 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Persico (US20070166424 A1) in view of Ducret (FR2996488 A1), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Chiu (US2020/0316886 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Perisco does not explicitly disclose wherein said first temperature is greater than or equal to 90°C, preferably greater than or equal to 110°C, and/or less than or equal to 160°C, preferably less than or equal to 140°C, wherein said second temperature is greater than or equal to 150°C, preferably greater than or equal to 170°C, and/or less than or equal to 250°C, preferably less than or equal to 230°C, and wherein a difference between said first temperature and said respective temperature of the shutter greater than or equal to 10°C, preferably greater than or equal to 30°C. However, analogous molding art, Chiu discloses a T1 in a range of 5-150 F and a T2 of 20 F -150 F [0033, 0035]. MPEP 2144.05 states overlapping range is a prima facie evidence of obviousness. Therefore, it would have bene obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated a range of greater than or equal to 90°C, preferably greater than or equal to 110°C, and/or less than or equal to 160°C, preferably less than or equal to 140°C, wherein said second temperature is greater than or equal to 150°C, preferably greater than or equal to 170°C, and/or less than or equal to 250°C, preferably less than or equal to 230°C, and wherein a difference between said first temperature and said respective temperature of the shutter greater than or equal to 10°C, preferably greater than or equal to 30°C in order to avoid deformities in the mold [0002].
Regarding claim 7, Perisco discloses another venting device (see annotated figure above) but does not explicitly disclose during said heating said main body until reaching said first temperature and said second temperature, operating said further venting device as said venting device is operated, and, during said cooling said main body: keeping said shutter in the open position and said respective shutter in the respective open position; generating a still further air flow which from the outer environment reaches said inner cavity through said venting device, and then returns to the outer environment through said further venting device. However, analogous molding art, Chiu, discloses heating a first temperature and then heating it up to a second temperature and further cooling it [0033, 0035] for the benefit of avoiding deformities in the mold.
As for the shutter remaining open, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the shutter open in order to allow air in. Further, the shutter has only two positions: open or closed. MPEP 2144.05 states a prima facie evidence of obviousness exists when obvious to try exists which is choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to heating a first temperature and then heating it up to a second temperature and further cooling it for the benefit of avoiding deformities in the mold and to have the shutter open in order to allow air flow and because it is within the skillset of one ordinary skill in the art to use “obvious to try” to fine identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARAH N TAUFIQ whose telephone number is (571)272-6765. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 8:00 am-4:30 pm.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571)270-1487. 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.
/FARAH TAUFIQ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1754