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 § 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 and 4-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Miyagawa et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0087999). Regarding Claims 1 and 12, Miyagawa et al., hereafter “Miyagawa,” show that it is known to have an apparatus which carries out a method for rotating a rotatable part about at least one axis of rotation of a machine for processing plastics and other plasticizable materials, having at least one movable segment for the manufacture of at least one molded part (Abstract), the method comprising a movement of the movable segment at least partly overlapped by a movement of a rotatable part (movable segment=3, rotatable part=9; 0093), wherein the movement of the rotatable part is started a molded part height of a molded part to be manufactured on the machine is exceeded as a spacing between the movable segment and the rotatable part (0093: it is interpreted that the gap between the movable segment and rotatable part will, at some point, be greater than a height of the molded part), wherein the rotatable part is mounted on a movable table and a movement of the table is at least partly overlapped by the movement of at least one of the movable segment and the rotatable part (movable table=7; 0093), and wherein the movements of at least one of the movable segment, the table, or the rotatable part are at least partly coupled to one another and are dependent on each other (0060, 0064-0069, 0072).
Regarding Claim 4, Miyagawa shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein the movement of the table in relation to the movement of the moveable segment is equal to one (0093: when the table moves, the segment moves).
Regarding Claim 5, Miyagawa shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein the coupling is carried out either mechanically (0072, 0092-0093: hydraulic=mechanical).
Regarding Claim 6, Miyagawa shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein movement of the movable segment, the rotatable part, or the movable table is position controlled (0067-0069).
Regarding Claim 7, Miyagawa shows the method of claim 4 above, including one wherein for position control, the movement of the rotatable part is linked by a mathematical function (0067: +180°).
Regarding Claim 8, Miyagawa shows the method of claim 4 above, including one wherein the movement of the rotatable part in at least one angular position about the axis of rotation is position-controlled along a rotational collision curve (0067: 180° around a circle).
Regarding Claim 9, Miyagawa shows the method of claim 6 above, including one wherein the rotational collision curve is dependent on at least one parameter of the rotatable part (0067: angular rotation).
Regarding Claim 10, Miyagawa shows the method of claim 7 above, including one wherein the at least one parameter of the rotatable part is taught (0067: degrees of rotation).
Regarding Claim 11, Miyagawa shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein a movement of at least one peripheral system is at least partly coupled to the movements of at least one of the movable segment (0075: injecting unit 12).
Regarding Claim 13, Miyagawa shows that it is known to have a computer program product with a program code for the purpose of carrying out the method of claim 1 (0090, 0114-0115, 0120, 0143).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art of record does not clearly show or suggest the claimed method for rotating a rotatable part about an axis of rotation of a machine for processing plastics and other plasticizable materials having a movable segment for the manufacture of a molded part, especially including a step in which movement of the rotatable part is started before a point in time at which a gap between the rotatable part and the movable segment is large enough to prevent a collision.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant contends that Miyagawa does not show the claimed method because he does not show movement of the rotatable part which is tied to the molded part height by which a demolded molded part projects out of the rotatable part. This is not commensurate in scope with the instant claim, which only requires “a molded part height” and could be broadly considered to be any height at any point on the molded part.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONICA HUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1198. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a-4p.
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.
MONICA ANNE HUSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1742
/MONICA A HUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights