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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-3 in the reply filed on 2/20/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 4-17 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1/8/24.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zheng (CN 112895290).
As to claim 1, a rotary platen that is disposed to face a mold platen, the rotary platen being provided to be rotatable with respect to the mold platen, and a mold being attachable to the rotary platen, wherein a plate-form member is attached to a surface of the rotary platen that faces the mold platen, and wherein a contour shape of the plate-form member is non-circular [Fig 4].
PNG
media_image1.png
812
720
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng (CN 112895290) in view of Rosato (Injection Molding Handbook).
As to claim 2, Zheng does not explicitly state that the plate form member is formed of a material having a hardness lower than that of the mold platen.
Rosato teaches injection molding techniques and equipment. Rosato notes that the mold platen requires high hardness/yield strength to protect press platen from damage [Page 364]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have altered the invention of Zheng and made the mold platen have a higher hardness than the plate form member (in other words had the plate form member have a hardness lower than the mold platen), as suggested by Rosato, in order to protect the mold platen from load deformation.
As to claim 3, The plate-form member would presumably be made of metal as this is typical of mold tooling.
Rosato teaches injection molding techniques and equipment. Rosato notes that mold tooling [Page 353-358] can be protected against abrasion and corrosion by applying dry lubricant/coating [Page 353, Table 4-24] to metal [Page 355, Table 4-24]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have altered the invention of Zheng and made the plate form member be made of metal with solid lubricant, as suggested by Rosato, in order to protect tooling from abrasion and corrosion.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARMAND MELENDEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-0342. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM- 6 PM Monday-Friday.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
/ARMAND MELENDEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights