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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 1/26/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 11-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1/26/2026.
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 2 and 9-10 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.
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites “the primary molded article” and “the primary molding cavity.” There is sufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. Claim 1 requires “a pair of primary molded articles” and “at least two or more primary molding cavities” and as such, there is ambiguity here as to which of the articles and cavities is being referred to in the claim.
Regarding claim 9, the claim recites “the primary molding cavity” in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. Claim 1 requires “at least two or more primary molding cavities” and so it would not be clear here what is referred to by “the primary molding cavity” when there are at least two primary molding cavities.
Claim 10 depends upon claim 9 and is likewise rejected for the same reason as claim 9.
Regarding claim 10, the claim recites “wherein the injection molding step and the press-fusion step are performed in parallel and substantially simultaneously” – however, this is not clear as the melting step requires “opening the mold and taking out the pair of the primary molded articles” and so it does not seem possible that these steps can be performed “in parallel” or “substantially simultaneously” with one another when they require an intermediate step in between, namely the “melting step” described above and claim 10 is required to include each and every limitation of claim 9, from which it depends.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-3 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bruggesser et al. (US 2014/0116371), hereinafter Bruggesser.
Regarding claim 1, Bruggesser discloses an injection molding machine system comprising:
(a) an injection molding machine (“injection molding device 2” – par. 0036);
(b) a mold (“mold bodies 6, 7” having “tool parts” 12, 13, 14, 15) – par. 0036) provided in the injection molding machine (Fig. 1-2);
(c) a heater device (“heating device 26” – par. 0042-0043, Fig. 5); and
(d) a pressing device (Fig. 6 at 30, shows the arrow denoting the movement of the “pressing device” which as a different configuration than the molding configuration, par. 0015, 0044 – “welding zones 28 rest against each other and are in particular pressed against each other”);
wherein the mold is configured to form at least two or more primary molding cavities (20, 21) and one or more secondary molding cavities (as shown in the configuration of Fig. 6); wherein each of the primary molding cavities is to form molding a primary molded article having a bonding end surface by injection molding (this is drafted as an intended use – see MPEP 2114),
wherein the secondary molding cavity (as shown in the configuration of Fig. 6) is for molding a molded article from a pair of the primary molded articles taken out from the primary molding cavities by placing the pair of primary molding articles in the secondary molding cavity and closing or clamping the mold (this is drafted as an intended use – see MPEP 2114),
wherein the heater device is configured to melt the bonding end surfaces of the pair of primary molded articles placed in the secondary molding cavity (par. 0018 – “welding process”), and wherein the pressing device is configured to press the pair of primary molded articles with molten bonding end surfaces (welding zones 28 – par. 0042) against each other in a state where the mold is closed (Fig. 6, par. 0044) or clamped such that the pair of primary molded articles (20, 21) are fused together (at weld seam 31 – Fig. 8) to obtain a molded article.
Examiner notes that the Bruggesser reference appears to include a functional insert (22) (par. 0053) within the molded article and is placed within prior to welding the ends together, but this would not mean that the claim is not met by the prior art as the term “comprising” denotes that the claim can include additional, unrecited elements (such as an insert). See MPEP 2111.03.
Regarding claim 2, Bruggesser discloses the subject matter of claim 1, and further discloses a conveying device (“insertion device 3” – par. 0036; Fig. 3) configured to convey the primary molded article in the primary molding cavity to the secondary molding cavity (par. 0015).
Regarding claim 3, Bruggesser discloses the subject matter of claim 1, and further discloses that the heater device includes a heater configured to emit an infrared ray (par. 0018 – “an infrared radiator is brought relatively close to the respective welding zone so as to achieve the desired heating by means of infrared radiation”).
Regarding claims 7-8, Bruggesser discloses the subject matter of claim 1, and further discloses that the injection molding machine includes a plurality of mold platens (“mold bodies 6, 7” or “tool parts” 12, 13, 14, 15 – par. 0036) that are clamped together, and the mold is provided on the plurality of mold platens or tool parts and has parting lines forming the primary/secondary cavities when opening and closing the mold.
Regarding claim 9, Bruggesser discloses the subject matter of claim 1, and further discloses a control device configured to perform: (a) an injection molding step (par. 0015) comprising molding the primary molded article by clamping the mold and injecting a material into the cavity; (b) a melting step comprising opening the mold, placing the molded articles into the secondary molding cavity, and melting the bonding surfaces by the hater (par. 0042, described above in claim 1); and (c) a press-fusion step comprising closing or clamping the mold (Fig. 6), and pressing the pair of primary molded articles against each other by the pressing device to fuse the articles together, resulting in the molded article (par. 0044; also described above in claim 1).
Regarding claim 10, Bruggesser discloses the subject matter of claim 9, and performs the injection molding and press-fusion step as required in claim 9, which is mutually exclusive with this first limitation, and further discloses that the system is configured to mold a pair of primary molded articles (by returning to the configuration of Figs 1-2).
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.
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 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bruggesser (US 2014/0116371) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Nishida (US 2005/0255267).
Regarding claims 4-6, Bruggesser discloses the subject matter of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose that the secondary molding cavity contains a slide core/member or an ejector rod as is required in these claims.
However, Nishida discloses a similar method to that of Bruggesser in that Nishida describes a molding of three semi-finished molded articles using a slide die, and first and second slide cores (Nishida, abstract; Fig. 4A-4B; par. 0034-0035, 0037, 0040), demonstrating that such a pressing mode was known in the art and useful in the production of similar types of “welded” injection molded articles pieced together (Nishida, par. 0034-0035) with inclined (or tapered) pins. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found the slide core/die which can work as an ejector of Nishida useful in the device of Bruggesser above as to have provided a similar pressing and way to remove the article from the mold after molding. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to have specified that the secondary molding cavity includes a slide core/member and an ejector rod as is required in the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW D GRAHAM whose telephone number is (469)295-9232. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30AM-4:00PM (CST).
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.
/ANDREW D GRAHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742