DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 & 3-7 are pending as amended on 07/02/26,
claims 5-6 being withdrawn.
Response to Amendment
This final action is a response to the amendment filed on July 2, 2026. Claim 2 has been cancelled. Claim 1 has been amended as a result of the previous action; the rejections have been redone accordingly.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1, 3-4 & 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawahara et al., JP 2016-168845 in view of Iwata et al., JP 2021-062522.
With regard to claim 1, Kawahara teaches a hot press capable of acting on a laminate, comprising two press ‘blocks’ (20), at least one of which comprises a flexible ‘buffer’ (1) between a pressing surface plate (22) and said block (throughout, e.g. abstract, [0029 & FIGS. 1-2]). Said buffer may be thicker and/or stiffer in a peripheral region [0029], which therefore reduces buffering effect relative to a central region.
While this reference does not expressly describe that this hot press ‘block’ is also mounted on a ‘board’ via insulative material, this was a conventional design for such a hot press, as shown for example by Iwata, which teaches a hot press with a hot plate mounted to a press board via insulation [0048], which would have been obvious to incorporate, in order to predictably direct heat toward the workpiece rather than the rest of the apparatus.
With regard to claims 3 & 7, again, said buffer may be thicker and/or stiffer in a peripheral region [0029], which therefore reduces buffering effect relative to a center.
With regard to claim 4, the amount of heat transfer through a thicker (as well as stiffer, i.e. denser) region would also be understood by one of ordinary skill to be similarly lessened (Iwata also teaches adjusting heat transmission at peripheral region).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see response, “Remarks,” filed July 2, 2026 with respect to the prior art rejections of the claims have been fully considered and are primarily drawn toward the claims as amended but are not persuasive. The provisional double patenting rejection has been rendered moot by amendments and is withdrawn.
With regard to Applicant’s assertion that Kawahara teaches designing a buffer’s peripheral region to be thicker and/or stiffer (as in Applicant’s invention), in order to apply a “uniform” press force & heat, such a force would of course be nonuniform, as the properties of the two regions are designed to differ. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand a passing general reference in the prior art to “uniform” pressing to refer to the conventional effect of any such conforming buffer material which ensures that all portions of a workpiece, i.e. even nonuniform designs, are sufficiently pressed. However, the press buffering effect of two portions with distinct material properties is not in fact “uniform” as argued – Applicant’s claimed difference in physical properties is met by the prior art. Modifying peripheral pressure/heating in a such presses was a known practice. Further, added features directed to an insulated means of mounting the hot plate in the apparatus were also known (e.g. Iwata) and thus also fail to patentably distinguish the claimed apparatus. Therefore the instant claims as written are still not considered to be patentably distinguishable over the teachings & suggestions of the prior art.
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 JOHN BLADES whose telephone number is (571)270-7661. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 PST.
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, Michael Orlando can be reached at (571)270-5038. 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.
/JOHN BLADES/
Examiner
Art Unit 1746
/PHILIP C TUCKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1745
