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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on August 5, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment to the claims filed August 5, 2026 has been entered. Claim 1 is currently amended. Claims 14-21 are new. Claims 9-12 have been canceled.
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 14-17, 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kolossow (US 6,074,084).
Regarding claim 14, Kolossow teaches a device for processing plastics material, comprising (Abstract; col. 1, lines 17-24; col. 3, lines 27-32) a multi-shaft screw machine having at least two treatment element shafts mounted in a housing for plasticizing the plastics material to form a plastics melt ((Figure 1 (19) (21) (22) (24) (26) (27) (29) (30) (31); col. 2, lines 53-60; col. 7, lines 36-55; col. 8, lines 45-57; col. 11, lines 30-47; col. 13, line 58-col. 14, line 7), wherein the multi-shaft screw machine has a plasticizing zone (Figure 1, zone (III) alone or zones (I)-(III) taken together are reasonably understood to form the claimed plasticizing zone; col. 3, lines 18-25 and 33-40; col. 8, lines 31-37), a discharge zone (Figure 1, upstream portion of zone (V) where screw elements (24) and (25) are found, starting at (13) and moving downstream, but ending upstream of (15)), and a backup zone arranged between the plasticizing zone and the discharge zone, having at least one backup element which holds back the plastics melt (Figure 1, shut-off zone (IV) includes blister (23) which blocks/holds back the plastic melt and diverts it to pump (11) through channel/melt pipe (12); col. 7, lines 1-10; col. 8, line 38; col. 9, lines 13-29), the treatment element shafts including screw elements in the discharge zone with the screw elements being uniform along an entire length of the discharge zone (Figure 1, upstream portion of zone (V) where screw elements (24) and (25) are found, starting at (13) and moving downstream, but ending upstream of (15));
at least one melt channel which bridges across the backup zone, connecting the plasticizing zone and the discharge zone directly to one another (Figure 1, channel/melt pipe (12) leads from extruder zone (III) to pump (11) and the outlet of the pump includes channel/melt pipe (13) which leads back into the extruder directly into the discharge zone (Figure 1, Figure 1, upstream portion of zone (V) where screw elements (24) and (25) are found, starting at (13) and moving downstream, but ending upstream of (15); col. 9, lines 13-29);
and at least one melt filter device for filtering the plastics melt, arranged and active in the melt channel (col. 9, lines 24-29; col. 10, lines 60-65).
As to claim 15, Kolossow teaches an outlet into the melt channel leading to the melt filter device is provided in the housing immediately before the backup zone, and in that an inlet of the melt channel coming from the melt filter device is provided in the housing immediately after the backup zone (Figure 1 (11) (12) and (13)).
As to claim 16, Kolossow teaches the filter is arranged in front of the pump (11) and includes a sieve changing device in the melt pipe (col. 9, lines 24-29) to extend the service life of the pump. This necessarily includes an ability to operate either continuously or discontinuously (e.g. continuously or discontinuously are the two options).
As to claim 17, Kolossow teaches gear pump (11) (Figure 1; col. 9, lines 22-24), which is a pressure building gear pump/melt pump (col. 2, lines 31-42; col. 4, lines 6-18).
As to claim 20, Kolossow teaches the multi-shaft screw machine is a twin-screw extruder (col. 7, lines 36-55; col. 11, lines 30-47; col. 13, line 58-col. 14, line 7).
As to claim 21, Kolossow teaches a discharge opening to discharge the plastics melt (Figure 1 (IX)) and an extrusion head (col. 14, lines 52-59).
Claims 14-17, 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Uphus (DE 10 2004 007479).
Regarding claim 14, Uphus teaches a device for processing plastics material, comprising (paragraphs [0001], [0002], [0010] and [0021]) a multi-shaft screw machine, in particular a twin-shaft screw machine, having at least two treatment element shafts mounted in a housing for plasticizing the plastics material to form a plastics melt (Figures 1 and 2 (1); paragraphs [0010], [0012], [0023], and [0025]), wherein the multi-shaft screw machine has a plasticizing zone (Figures 1 and 2 (2’); paragraphs [0014], [0023], [0024]), a discharge zone (Figures 1 and 2, downstream of 3’ where (5) re-enters the extruder; paragraphs [0014], [0023], [0024]), and a backup zone arranged between the plasticizing zone and the discharge zone, having at least one backup element which holds back the plastics melt (Figures 1 and 2 (4) is a sealing device located in what is understood to be a backup zone arranged as claimed that blocks/holds back the material in the extruder and directs it to bypass (5); paragraphs [0013], [0023] and [0024]), the treatment element shafts including screw elements in the discharge zone, the screw elements of each treatment element shaft being uniform along an entire length of the discharge zone (Figures 1 and 2; screw section beginning at the re-entry position near (7) and continuing downstream in the melt traveling direction to the end of what is shown in the figures);
at least one melt channel which bridges across the backup zone, connecting the plasticizing zone and the discharge zone directly to one another (Figure 2 (5); paragraphs [0013], [0023], [0024]);
and at least one melt filter device/sieve for filtering the plastics melt, arranged and active in the melt channel (paragraphs [0015], [0025]).
As to claim 15, Uphus teaches an outlet into the melt channel leading to the melt filter device is provided in the housing immediately before the backup zone, and in that an inlet of the melt channel coming from the melt filter device is provided in the housing immediately after the backup zone (Figure 2 (5) (6) and (7)).
As to claim 16, Uphus teaches the filter/sieve is arranged downstream of a gear pump (paragraph [0015]). This necessarily includes an ability to operate either continuously or discontinuously (e.g. continuously or discontinuously are the two options).
As to claim 17, Uphus teaches a gear pump, which is a pressure building gear pump/melt pump (paragraphs [0015], [0025]).
As to claim 20, Uphus teaches the multi-shaft screw machine is a twin-screw extruder (Figures 1 and 2 (1); paragraphs [0010], [0012], [0023], and [0025]).
As to claim 21, Uphus teaches a discharge opening to discharge the plastics melt, such as a spray head, injection head, or slot nozzle (paragraphs [0010] and [0016]).
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.
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 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kolossow (US 6,074,084), as applied to claims 14-17, 20 and 21 above, and further in view of Schulz (US 2010/0034917).
As to claims 18 and 19, Kolossow teaches the device set forth above. Kolossow does not explicitly teach utilizing a degassing opening connected to a degassing device, such as a vacuum degassing device, or open for degassing or venting to the atmosphere as claimed. However, Schulz teaches an analogous device wherein degassing openings connected to a degassing device, such as a vacuum degassing device/pump, as claimed are utilized (Abstract; paragraphs [0008] and [0014]-[0016]; Figure 1 (8) -degassing vent/degassing opening; (10) – degassing opening vent; (11) – vacuum pump connected to vent (10)).
Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Kolossow and Schulz and to have utilized the degassing opening connecting to a degassing device, such as a vacuum pump/degassing device, in the device of Kolossow, as suggested by Schulz, for the purpose, as suggested by Schulz, of removing gases (e.g. water vapor) from the plastic melt.
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uphus (DE 10 2004 007479), as applied to claims 14-17, 20 and 21 above, and further in view of Schulz (US 2010/0034917).
As to claims 18 and 19, Uphus teaches the device set forth above. Uphus does not explicitly teach utilizing a degassing opening connected to a degassing device, such as a vacuum degassing device, or open for degassing or venting to the atmosphere as claimed. However, Schulz teaches an analogous device wherein degassing openings connected to a degassing device, such as a vacuum degassing device/pump, as claimed are utilized (Abstract; paragraphs [0008] and [0014]-[0016]; Figure 1 (8) -degassing vent/degassing opening; (10) – degassing opening vent; (11) – vacuum pump connected to vent (10)).
Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Uphus and Schulz and to have utilized the degassing opening connecting to a degassing device, such as a vacuum pump/degassing device, in the device of Uphus, as suggested by Schulz, for the purpose, as suggested by Schulz, of removing gases (e.g. water vapor) from the plastic melt.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 and 13 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed August 5, 2026 have been fully considered. The amendment to the claims has overcome the previous nonstatutory double patenting rejection. As such, the rejection has been withdrawn. Additionally, the amendment to claim 1 has overcome the art of record. As such, the prior art rejections of claim 1 have been withdrawn.
Regarding new claim 14, the Kolossow reference is understood to remain applicable. The claimed discharge zone is still reasonably met by Kolossow and the claim is understood to remain broader than is suggested by the arguments. For example, the “discharge zone” is not understood to necessarily begin upstream from the position the melt channel re-enters the extruder while continuing downstream all the way to the discharge opening at the end of the extruder. The language set forth in the claim does not require this for the zone to be considered a “discharge zone”. For example, the discharge zone is reasonably understood to be the zone into which the melt bypass is discharged (re-enters) back into the extruder. To the extent the limitation is reasonably supported by the instant specification, elements (24) and (25) in Figure 1 of Kolossow are also understood to disclose “screw elements in the discharge zone” wherein “the screw elements of each treatment element shaft being uniform along an entire length of the discharge zone” where the discharge zone of Kolossow is understood to be the upstream portion of zone (V) where screw elements (24) and (25) are found, starting at (13) and moving downstream, but ending upstream of (15). It is submitted that the claims would need to be further amended to overcome this reasonable interpretation of the teaching of Kolossow.
Similarly, the Uphus reference is also understood to remain applicable. To the extent the treatment elements being uniform along an entire length of discharge zone is understood to be disclosed in the instant application (as shown in Figure 1 without any additional language provided), this is what is understood to be shown in Figures 1 and 2 of Uphus. The melt re-enters the extruder at (7) into a zone that has screw elements that also appear to be uniform to the disclosed extent. Further, while the Figures of Uphus cutoff before the discharge opening of the extruder is shown, what is shown is sufficiently understood to be a discharge zone within the scope of the claim because the zone remains open to a broad reasonable interpretation as discussed above. Further, it also seems reasonable to conclude the structure shown at the end of the Figures continues as is or that it would be prima facie obvious for the structure to continue as is until reaching the discharge opening of the extruder.
It is submitted that the claims would need to be further amended to overcome the fair teaching and suggestion of the applied references.
As to the amendment to claim 1, the scope of the claim is understood to sufficiently correspond with what is shown in applicant’s Figure 1 such that it overcomes the teaching and suggestion of the prior art of record. Kneading discs/elements (156) in plasticizing zone (144) are understood to extend along an entire length of the zone as claimed and shown in Figure 1 and this limitation is set forth in combination with the limitation that the melt channel (160) begins at a position within the plasticizing zone such that it is able to directly connect the plasticizing zone to the discharge zone (e.g. beginning at melt channel outlet (164) from the extruder and extending to melt channel inlet (166) back into the extruder).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeff Wollschlager whose telephone number is (571)272-8937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-3:30.
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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1176. 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.
/JEFFREY M WOLLSCHLAGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights