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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed Dec. 31, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-9 remain pending in the application.
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 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.
Claims 1-5, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Koichi et al. (JP H1142698A, English translation provided).
Regarding claim 1, Koichi discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 1, 2, 3, a resin container manufacturing device comprising:
an injection molding part (e.g., preform 24 (page 8, line 462)) configured to injection-mold a first number of bottomed resin preforms (e.g., two rows of 16 preforms 24 are injection molded (page 6, line 337)) by using an injection molding mold (e.g., injection molding device 28 (page 8, line 462)), the injection molding mold comprising an injection core mold (e.g., injection core mold 42 (page 4, line 210)) and an injection cavity mold (e.g., injection cavity mold 40 (page 4, line 210));
a temperature adjustment part (e.g., cooling station 14 and heating station 16 (page 4, line 224)) comprising a housing member (e.g., preform transfer mechanism 20 (page 8, lines 461-462)) configured to receive the preforms demolded from the injection core mold in a high-temperature state, the temperature adjustment part being configured to perform temperature adjustment on the preforms (page 4, [0038], [0039]); and
a blow molding part configured to receive the preforms from the temperature adjustment part and blow-mold the preforms into resin containers (page 4, [0040] (e.g., the stretch blow molding station 18)),
wherein the injection core mold is configured to reciprocate between an injection molding position of the preforms and a demolding position of the preforms (page 6, [0055], lines 337-339 (e.g., in the injection molding station 12 (as shown in Fig. 3), two rows of 61 preforms 24 are injection-molded, and when the upper mold clamping platen 36 is lifted and the preforms 24 are released from the injection cavity mold 40)), and
As illustrated in Fig. 2 or 3, Koichi discloses that, the preform transfer mechanism 20 includes a take-out mechanism 84 and the take-out mechanism 84 with respect to a support base 100 (page 5, [0043], lines 247-248).
As illustrated in Fig. 3, Koichi discloses that, after the gripping mechanism 120 holds the neck portion of the preform 24, the elevating cylinder 132 raises the elevating table 155, and the two horizontal rotating cylinders 122 with the preform 24 completely pulled out from the placing member 98 (page 7, [0057], lines 370-372).
Thus, at this location (as shown in Fig. 3), the take-out mechanism totally finished the demolding of the preforms. Thus, Koichi discloses that, as illustrated in Fig. 3, the injection molding position is in the injection molding station 12 and the completely demolding of the preform is finished in the preform transfer mechanism 20 which is located in a different position from the injection molding station 12.
wherein the temperature adjustment part is configured to perform the temperature adjustment by dividing the preforms housed in the housing member into a third number of groups, each of the third number of groups comprising a second number of preforms that is smaller than the first number (e.g., as illustrated in Fig. 2, in the cooling station 14, two sets of four cylindrical rotary mounting members 142 are arranged in the transport direction A (page 6, [0052], lines 318-319). Thus, these two sets of four housing members for transporting the preforms in the temperature adjustment unit(s) are considered as the third number and the second number of groups/preforms which is smaller than the first number of preforms (i.e., 16 pieces in total)).
Regarding claims 2, 3, 4, 5, Koichi discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 1, 2, 3, the housing member comprising:
a first housing member (e.g., one of two sets of gripping mechanism 120 having gripper member 124 (page 5, [0048], [0049], lines 292-293)) configured to move the housed preforms along a first route from the demolding position to a first transfer position at which the temperature adjustment is performed ([0048], [0049], [0050], [0051]); and
a second housing member (e.g., one of two sets of gripping mechanism 120 having gripper member 124 (page 5, [0048], [0049], lines 292-293)) configured to move housed preforms along a second route different from the first route from the demolding position to a second transfer position at which the temperature adjustment is performed ([0048], [0049], [0050], [0051]), and
wherein while the preforms housed in one of the first housing member and the second housing member are conveyed to the temperature adjustment part or the blow molding part, the other of the first housing member and the second housing member is disposed at the demolding position and waits for reception of the preforms to be injection-molded next (as shown in Fig. 2; page 6, [0051], [0052], [0053], [0055]).
As illustrated in Fig. 3, there are two rows of the injection core mold 42 corresponding with the respective injection cavity mold 40. One row of the injection core mold 42 is 8 pieces being considered as the first injection core mold and another row of the injection core mold 42 is 8 pieces being considered as the second injection core mold. When the upper mold clamping platen 36 is lifted and the preforms 24 are released from the injection cavity mold 40 (page 6l [0055], lines 337-338) (related to claim 4 (i.e., for demolding, respectively)). The released preforms 24 falls into the mounting members 98 while being guided by the injection core mold 42 (page 6, [55], lines 348-349). The griping mechanism 120 is exposed on the mounting member 98 from the upper retracted position by the elevating cylinder 132 and then the gripping member 124 is to hold the neck portion of the preform 24 (page 7, [0057], lines 365-372) (related to claim 3). Each gripping mechanism 120 is horizontally rotated by 90 degrees (page 7, [0057], lines 372-373). After confirming that the preform 24 has been completely pulled out from the placing member 98, the moving table 134 (it is noticed that, as illustrated in Fig. 3, the gripping mechanism 120 is mounted under the table 134) is moved along the horizontal drive rail 133 by the horizontal drive cylinder 135 (page 7, [0057], lines 376-377). It is noticed that, the two rows of the preforms 24 gripped by the gripper member 124 are entering the cooling zone 14 (i.e., the temperature adjustment zone) (related to claim 5).
Regarding claim 9, Koichi discloses that, as illustrated in Fig. 1, the heating station 16 has a heating box 64 having an infrared heater (page 4, [0039], lines 231-232).
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:
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 6, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koichi et al. (JP H1142698A, English translation provided) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Tsuchiya (WO 2020/158917, English version based on US 2022/0009145).
Regarding claims 6, 7, Koichi does not explicitly disclose that, in the temperature adjustment part, a temperature adjustment core member is applied to insert into the preform to perform the temperature adjustment and during the filling/injecting and cooling of the preforms, the cooling time is ½ or less of the filling time. In the same field of endeavor, injection blow-molding, Tsuchiya discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 3, 4, the temperature adjustment core mold 21 or the air introduction /discharge member 21a is inserted into the preform 1 ([0034], lines 12-14) and By contact with the temperature adjustment core mold 21 and the temperature adjustment cavity mold 22, the preform is cooled and is temperature-adjusted to a temperature suitable for blow molding ([0035], lines 1-7 from bottom). Tsuchiya discloses that, for example, preferably the cooling time is ½ or less of the injection/filling time ([0030], lines 1-3 from bottom) (related to claim 7).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Koichi to incorporate the teachings of Tsuchiya to provide that the temperature adjustment core member is applied to insert into the preform to perform the temperature adjustment and during the filling/injecting and cooling of the preforms, the cooling time is ½ or less of the filling time. Doing so would be possible to manufacture a container of good quality where a molding cycle time is shortened, as recognized by Tsuchiya ([0008], [0009]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koichi et al. (JP H1142698A, English translation provided) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Yanagisawa (EP2599610).
Regarding claim 8, Koichi does not disclose an intermediate blow-molded part before obtaining the final resin containers. In the same field of endeavor, containers, Yanagisawa discloses that, as illustrated in Figs. 2, 3, in a primary blow-molding station 140, an intermediate molded article 40 is produced first and in the final blow-molding station 230, the final container 10 is produced ([0028], [0029], [0030], [0031]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Koichi to incorporate the teachings of Yanagisawa to provide the intermediate blow-molded part before obtaining the resin containers. Doing so would be possible to manufacture a container with a heat-resistant property at a relatively low cost, as recognized by Yanagisawa ([0010], [0011]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/31/2025 have been fully considered. They are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments (as amended) in claim 1 that the base reference Koichi does not disclose that, the injection core mold is configured to reciprocate between an injection molding position of the preforms and a demolding position of the preforms, the injection molding position and the demolding position differing in position in a plane according to a horizontal plane, it is not persuasive.
Koichi discloses that, in page 6, [0055], lines 337-339, in the injection molding station 12 (as shown in Fig. 3), two rows of 61 preforms 24 are injection-molded, and when the upper mold clamping platen 36 is lifted and the preforms 24 are released from the injection cavity mold 40. At least, in the injection molding station 12, the demolding of the preform is started.
As illustrated in Fig. 2 or 3, Koichi discloses that, the preform transfer mechanism 20 includes a take-out mechanism 84 and the take-out mechanism 84 with respect to a support base 100 (page 5, [0043], lines 247-248).
As illustrated in Fig. 3, Koichi discloses that, after the gripping mechanism 120 holds the neck portion of the preform 24, the elevating cylinder 132 raises the elevating table 155, and the two horizontal rotating cylinders 122 with the preform 24 completely pulled out from the placing member 98 (page 7, [0057], lines 370-372).
Thus, at this location (as shown in Fig. 3), the take-out mechanism totally finished the demolding of the preforms. Thus, Koichi discloses that, as illustrated in Fig. 3, the injection molding position is in the injection molding station 12 and the completely demolding of the preform is finished in the preform transfer mechanism 20 which is located in a different position from the injection molding station 12.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shibin Liang whose telephone number is (571)272-8811. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30 - 4:30.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alison L Hindenlang can be reached on (571)270 7001. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/SHIBIN LIANG/Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/ALISON L HINDENLANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1741