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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-13, drawn to a modular forming tool and exchangeable forming component, classified in B21D 25/02.
II. Claims 14-20, drawn to a method of forming sheet metal components, classified in B21D 22/02.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions I and II are related as product and process of use. The inventions can be shown to be distinct if either or both of the following can be shown: (1) the process for using the product as claimed can be practiced with another materially different product or (2) the product as claimed can be used in a materially different process of using that product. See MPEP § 806.05(h). In the instant case, the method of forming sheet metal components can be practiced with an exchangeable forming tool constructed in a manner other than by additive manufacturing.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
the inventions require a different field of search searching different classes/subclasses and employing different search strategies or search queries.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
During a telephone conversation with Michael Benoit on March 10, 2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of the elected group, claims 1-13. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 14-20 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 5,901,593 to Fritz, hereinafter “Fritz”.
Regarding claim 1, Fritz discloses a modular forming tool configured for removable mounting relative to a support structure to form a sheet metal component (forming tool formblock 14 in Figs. 4-6 and is configured for removable mounting relative to a support structure and is disclosed as forming sheet metal component 26a in Fig. 6; col. 3, line 53 through col. 4, line 23), said modular forming tool comprising:
an exchangeable forming component which is constructed using additive manufacturing (formblock 14 in Figs. 4-6 is an exchangeable forming component constructed using additive manufacturing),
wherein the exchangeable forming component presents
a first surface which provides an exchangeable forming surface shaped to form the sheet metal component (the upper surface of formblock 14 is shown as a surface which forms sheet metal blank 26 in Fig. 5 to formed sheet 26a in Fig. 6), and
a second surface configured to removably engage the support structure and align the exchangeable forming surface relative to the support structure (the bottom and/or side surfaces of formblock 14 in Figs. 4-6 are configured to removably engage support structure in a press as disclosed at col. 4, line 10-23).
Regarding claim 2, Fritz anticipates the modular forming tool of claim 1 as explained above. Fritz further discloses the exchangeable forming component is 3D printed out of a polymer material. Column 4, line 4-14 discloses formblock 14 was 3D printed out of photopolymer epoxy resin.
Regarding claim 12, Fritz discloses an exchangeable forming component configured for removable mounting relative to an interface block of a modular forming tool (formblock 14 in Figs. 4-6 is disclosed as an exchangeable forming component configured to be removably mounted to an interface block of a rubber pad forming hydropress modular forming tool disclosed at col. 4, line 4-23), with the interface block of the modular forming tool configured for removable mounting relative to a support structure to form a sheet metal component, said exchangeable forming component comprising:
a component structure which is constructed using additive manufacturing (component structure formblock 14 in Figs. 4-6 is constructed using additive manufacturing),
wherein the exchangeable forming component presents
a first surface which provides an exchangeable forming surface shaped to form the sheet metal component (the upper surface of formblock 14 is shown as a surface which forms sheet metal blank 26 in Fig. 5 to formed sheet 26a in Fig. 6), and a second surface configured to removably engage the support structure (the bottom and/or side surfaces of formblock 14 in Figs. 4-6 are configured to removably engage support structure in a press as disclosed at col. 4, line 10-23).
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fritz in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0018277 A1 by Hielscher, hereinafter “Hielscher”.
Regarding claim 3, Fritz anticipates the modular forming tool of claim 1 as explained above. However, Fritz does not disclose the exchangeable forming component defines one or more bore holes intersecting the first surface and one or more prick punch systems operably located inside the one or more bore holes.
In the same field of forming metal sheets, Hielscher teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate one or more bore holes (see “Bore Hole” annotation to Fig. 1 of Hielscher reproduced below) in the forming surface of an exchangeable forming component (forming component punch 9 and lower shaping die 3 in Figs. 1-6 are shown as separate parts of apparatus 1 such that they may be exchanged with other forming component of differing shape; ¶[0017] and [0018]) with one or more prick punch systems operably located inside the one or more bore holes (prick punch system secondary punch 90 in Fig. 1 is located inside the Bore Hole as annotated below; ¶[0019]).
PNG
media_image1.png
1048
1010
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a punch system into Fritz’s exchangeable forming component in the same way Hielscher teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Hielscher to the exchangeable forming component of Fritz would achieve the predictable result of Fritz’s exchangeable forming component with a punch system incorporated therein.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fritz in view of Hielscher and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,631,996 to Magnuson, hereinafter “Magnuson”.
Regarding claim 4, the prior art reference combination of Fritz in view of Hielscher renders the modular forming tool of claim 3 unpatentable as explained above. However, Hielscher is silent regarding the type of energy source used to actuate actuator 16 in Fig. 1. See paragraph [0019] of Hielscher.
In the same field of punch actuators, Magnuson teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use pneumatic actuation to actuate a punch of a punch press. See column 1, line 22-24.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use pneumatic actuation in actuating Hielscher’s punch system in the same way Magnuson teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Magnuson to the punch system of Hielscher would achieve the predictable result of a pneumatically-actuated punch system used with Fritz’s disclosed exchangeable forming component.
Claims 5-7 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fritz in view of U.S. Patent No. 2,279,965 to Berliner et al., hereinafter “Berliner”.
Regarding claim 5, Fritz anticipates the modular forming tool of claim 1 as explained above. However, Fritz does not disclose the details of an interface block as claimed in claim 5.
In the same field of stretch forming apparatus, Berliner teaches a metal forming machine shown in Fig. 1 using a modular forming tool comprising an exchangeable forming component (form 24 in Fig. 1) and an interface block support structure (head 22 in Fig. 1). The exchangeable forming component has first and second surfaces. See “First Surface” and “Second Surface” annotations to Fig. 1 of Berliner reproduced below. The interface block presents a third surface for removably mating with the second surface of the exchangeable forming component and a fourth surface. See “Third Surface” and “Fourth Surface” annotations below. An attachment element attaches the exchangeable forming component to the interface block when the second surface is mated to the third surface. See “Attachment Element” annotation below.
PNG
media_image2.png
612
1205
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute Fritz’s exchangeable forming component formblock 14 for Berliner’s exchangeable forming component form 24 to achieve the predictable result of Berliner’s modular forming tool with an exchangeable forming component constructed using additive manufacturing as Fritz discloses.
Regarding claim 6, the prior art reference combination of Fritz in view of Berliner renders the modular forming tool of claim 5 unpatentable as explained above. Berliner further teaches:
a baseplate configured to be affixed to a forming machine (Forming machine plunger 20 in Fig. 1 has a base plate affixed thereto. See “Base Plate” annotation to Fig. 1 of Berliner reproduced below.), wherein the baseplate presents
a fifth surface, for mating with the fourth surface of the interface block (the upper surface of the Base Plate is a fifth surface which mates to the Fourth Surface of interface block head 22 as annotated in the rejection of claim 5 above); and
a second attachment element for mounting the baseplate to interface block, when the fourth surface is mated with the fifth surface (see “Second Attachment Element” annotation below).
PNG
media_image3.png
670
901
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, the prior art reference combination of Fritz in view of Berliner renders the modular forming tool of claim 6 unpatentable as explained above. Fritz further discloses the exchangeable forming surface is 3D printed out of a polymer material. Column 4, line 4-14 discloses formblock 14 was 3D printed out of photopolymer epoxy resin.
Regarding claim 9, the prior art reference combination of Fritz in view of Berliner renders the modular forming tool of claim 6 unpatentable as explained above. Berliner further teaches
the second surface and the third surface cooperate with each other to be self-aligning when mated together (the Attachment Element as annotated in the rejection of claim 5 above self-aligns the Second Surface and the Third Surface when the two are mated together), such that:
the exchangeable forming surface and interface block are aligned with one another (Fig. 1 shows the First Surface exchangeable forming surface is aligned with interface block head 22); and
deformation of the exchangeable forming surface during operation is restricted (deformation of the forming surface is restricted due to proper alignment of form 24 with clamps 14).
Regarding claim 10, the prior art reference combination of Fritz in view of Berliner renders the modular forming tool of claim 9 unpatentable as explained above. Berliner further teaches
a plurality of additional exchangeable forming components (col. 2, line 32-39 teach form 24 shown in Fig. 1 may be exchanged with other forms having differing transverse section than the one shown in the drawing);
wherein each of the plurality of additional exchangeable forming components has a respective alignment surface which is identical in shape to the second surface of the exchangeable forming component (each of the other forms having differing transverse section than the one shown in Fig. 1 would have the same alignment structure shown in Fig. 1 which aligns into the Alignment Surface of head 22 as annotated in the rejection of claim 5 above);
wherein each of the respective alignment surfaces, of the plurality of additional exchangeable forming components, is compatible for mating with the third surface of the interface block (the alignment structure of all of the exchangeable forms 24 would be compatible for mating with the Third Surface of head 22).
Regarding claim 11, the prior art reference combination of Fritz in view of Berliner renders the modular forming tool of claim 10 unpatentable as explained above. Berliner further teaches the plurality of additional exchangeable forming components form a plurality of additional sheet metal component designs. Column 2, line 32-39 teach the other forms of differing transverse section are used to form sheet metal components corresponding to the transverse section of the other forms.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fritz in view of Berliner and further in view of Hielscher.
Regarding claim 8, the prior art reference combination of Fritz in view of Berliner renders the modular forming tool of claim 6 unpatentable as explained above. However, neither Fritz nor Berliner teach an exchangeable forming component defining one or more bore holes intersecting the forming surface and one or more prick punching systems operably located inside the bore holes.
In the same field of forming metal sheets, Hielscher teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate one or more bore holes (see “Bore Hole” annotation to Fig. 1 of Hielscher reproduced above) in the forming surface of an exchangeable forming component (forming component punch 9 and lower shaping die 3 in Figs. 1-6 are shown as separate parts of apparatus 1 such that they may be exchanged with other forming component of differing shape; ¶[0017] and [0018]) with one or more prick punch systems operably located inside the one or more bore holes (prick punch system secondary punch 90 in Fig. 1 is located inside the Bore Hole as annotated above; ¶[0019]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a punch system into Fritz’s exchangeable forming component in the same way Hielscher teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Hielscher to the exchangeable forming component of Fritz would achieve the predictable result of Fritz’s exchangeable forming component with a punch system incorporated therein.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fritz in view of Hielscher.
Regarding claim 13, Fritz anticipates the exchangeable forming component of claim 12 as explained above. However, Fritz does not disclose the exchangeable forming component defines one or more bore holes intersecting the first surface; and one or more prick punch systems operably located inside the one or more bore holes.
In the same field of forming metal sheets, Hielscher teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate one or more bore holes (see “Bore Hole” annotation to Fig. 1 of Hielscher reproduced above) in the forming surface of an exchangeable forming component (forming component punch 9 and lower shaping die 3 in Figs. 1-6 are shown as separate parts of apparatus 1 such that they may be exchanged with other forming component of differing shape; ¶[0017] and [0018]) with one or more prick punch systems operably located inside the one or more bore holes (prick punch system secondary punch 90 in Fig. 1 is located inside the Bore Hole as annotated above; ¶[0019]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a punch system into Fritz’s exchangeable forming component in the same way Hielscher teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Hielscher to the exchangeable forming component of Fritz would achieve the predictable result of Fritz’s exchangeable forming component with a punch system incorporated therein.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL DEREK PRESSLEY whose telephone number is (313)446-6658. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am to 3:30pm Eastern.
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, Christopher Templeton can be reached at (571) 270-1477. 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.
/P DEREK PRESSLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3725