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 .
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 3 and 6 are 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.
With regards to claim 3, the claim appears to recite method limitations, i.e. a pressing step and a transporting step, however the claim is directed to an apparatus, therefore it is unclear how the method limitations further define the structure of the apparatus. It is noted that the limitations are being treated as an intended use/function of the press for examination purposes.
With regards to claim 6, the claim appears to be further defining an element that is not positively recited, specifically the claim is further defining the component that is formed by the press however the component is not a structural element of the press therefore it does not hold any patentable weight to the apparatus claim. For examination purposes the limitation is being treated as an intended use of the press.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasuo et al (JP2003200296; cited by Applicant) in view of Fowler et al (US 2,976,753).
In reference to claim 1, Yasuo discloses a progressive press metal mold comprising
a lower mold (11) including a die having a plurality of die holes (21-25) corresponding to shapes formed by pressing [see paragraph 0022],
an upper mold (12) including punches corresponding to the respective die holes (21-25), the upper mold capable of approaching and moving away from the lower mold, the punches and the corresponding die holes forming a plurality of processing stages (S1-S5) where a belt-shaped metal material is transported sequentially to perform predetermined pressing on the belt-shaped metal material with the punches and die holes in the respective processing stages [see paragraph 0022; figures 1-3].
Yasuo further discloses a plurality of lifter components (311 to 357) disposed on the lower mold and surrounding each die hole to lift the metal material a predetermined distance from the die wherein the lifters at the final stage (S5) is designed to lift the material higher than the previous stages (S1-S4) to prevent bending of the metal material or the metal material getting caught in the die hole [see paragraphs 0006 & 0029].
Yasuo discloses the invention substantially as claimed except for wherein a magnetic element is disposed in a specific processing stage to attract the metal material to be transported.
However, Fowler et al teaches of a press mold having a magnetic element (42) disposed in an upper mold (26) to attract the metal material to the upper mold when lifted from a lower mold (22) upon completion of a pressing operation [see figure 2, col. 2 lines 19-35].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the lifters of the final stage (S5) of Yasuo with the magnetic lifter element, as taught by Fowler et al, since such a substitution would allow for the clearance of the metal material and prevent bending and catching within the die hole.
In reference to claim 2, Fowler et al further teaches the magnetic element is formed by an electromagnet that generates magnetic force, when energized, and attracts, by the magnetic force, the blet shaped metal material by being energized at a predetermined timing [see col. 2 lines 53-57].
In reference to claim 3, as best understood, the combination of Yasuo and Fowler et al further discloses the upper mold is capable of approaching the lower mold, to press the belt shaped metal material with the punches and the die holes in the processing stages, and the upper mold is capable of moving away from the lower mold to transport the belt shaped metal material sequentially to the subsequent processing stages are performed repeatedly [see Yasuo paragraph 0022], and the magnetic element attracts the belt shaped metal material to be transported in the specific process stage by being energized only during the transporting [see Fowler et al col. 2 lines 19-35].
In reference to claim 4, the specific processing stage is capable of having a plurality of sheet materials punched from the belt shaped metal material be stacked to form an integrated multilayer component, and a processing stage before the specific processing stage is capable of having an adhesive applied to parts where the sheet materials are to be stacked in the specific processing stage. It is noted that these limitations are being treated as an intended use/function since they do not further provide any structural components but rather appear to recite method step and the claim is directed to an apparatus.
In reference to claim 5, Yasuo further discloses a lifter component (311-346), that holds up the belt shaped metal material at a predetermined distance from a surface of the die in the process of transporting the belt shaped metal material sequentially to the plurality of processing stages, is disposed on the lower mold [see paragraph 0024-0029].
The combination of Yasuo and Fowler et al further discloses the lifter component (311-346) is not disposed in the specific processing stage.
In reference to claim 6, the progressive press metal mold is capable of forming a rotor or stator of a motor [see paragraph 0046].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Debra Sullivan whose telephone number is (571)272-1904. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4:30pm EST.
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, Chris Templeton can be reached on (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 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Debra M Sullivan/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725