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 1-9, in the reply filed on March 23, 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 Claims 10 and 11 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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 1-9 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 1, the claim is directed to “auxiliary molding equipment”. However, the claim includes a significant amount of language that appears to merely define how and where the auxiliary molding equipment is intended to be used. As set forth in the claim, it is unclear which limitations are necessarily structural limitations that are positively required and which limitations are limitations that that merely describe how the auxiliary molding equipment must be capable of being used. It is clear, for example, that claim 1 does not require an autoclave because claim 9 positively introduces an autoclave as a limitation. However, it remains unclear whether claim 1 positively requires “a bottomed tubular heating object” because it is not clear whether this is a component associated with or part of the not required autoclave that is to be positioned in the heating passage of the autoclave or whether it is positively utilized as a structural requirement in combination with the “auxiliary molding equipment” such that both the auxiliary molding equipment and the bottomed tubular heating target object are required within the scope of the claim. Since the claim is directed to the auxiliary molding equipment and not a combination that requires the bottomed tubular heating target object and the autoclave in addition to the auxiliary molding equipment, the limitation “bottomed tubular heating target object” is understood to limit the claims only to the extent that the relied upon auxiliary molding equipment must be capable of being positioned and utilized with a bottomed tubular heating target object (e.g. (5)) as claimed. It is noted that claims are only limited by positively recited elements (see MPEP 2115). Appropriate correction and clarification are required.
As to claim 9, the claim recites “an inlet port” and “an outlet port”. It is not clear whether this is referring back to the inlet and outlet port set forth in claim 1 or whether something else is intended. Further, claim 1 is directed to “auxiliary molding equipment” and claim 9 now combines the molding equipment and the autoclave recited in claim 1. As such, while it is clear that claim 1 does not positively require anything other than the recited auxiliary molding equipment as discussed above, it is not clear here in claim 9 whether other limitations, such as the bottomed tubular heating target object, are now also required as part of the autoclave or whether these further limitations are not positively required and must only be capable of being utilized with the positively recited equipment. Appropriate correction and clarification are required.
As to claims 2-8, the claims are rejected as dependent claims.
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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tulley (US 1,184,151).
Regarding claim 1, Tulley teaches auxiliary molding equipment/a nozzle (1) that is capable of heating a bottomed tubular heating target object in a heating passage with an autoclave to mold a molding target object, the autoclave including the heating passage including an inlet port into which a heating gas flows and an outlet port from which the heating gas flows out, the heating target object including the molding target object and an opening (note: the limitations directed to the heating target object and the autoclave are interpreted as set forth above in the section 112b rejection), the auxiliary molding equipment comprising a tubular body including a first end opening (Figure 1, rear end near (3); page 1, lines 33-81), a second end opening located at an opposite side of the first end opening (Figure 1 front end near bell mouth (2)), and an internal passage through which the first end opening and the second end opening communicate with each other (Figures 1-3), wherein the tubular body includes a first tubular portion that includes the first end opening (Figure 1) and is capable of being located in an internal space of the heating target object and a second tubular portion that includes the second end opening, is capable of being located so as to project to an outside of the heating target object through the opening of the heating target object, and has an outer shape expanding toward the second end opening (Figure 1 bell mouth (2)).
As to claim 2, Tulley teaches the second end opening (Figure 1 bell mouth (2)) is larger than the first end opening (Figure 1, rear end near (3)).
As to claim 3, Tulley teaches the outer shape of the second tubular portion when viewed as claimed is a funnel shape/bell mouth as claimed (Figures 1-3).
As to claim 4, Tulley teaches the nozzle includes a projection on an outer peripheral surface of the first tubular portion (Figures 1-3, any element projecting from the surface, including (3), (10) (11) (13)).
As to claim 5, Tulley teaches at least one hole open in a radial direction as claimed (Figures 1 and 2 (13) (14) (15) – air inlet).
As to claim 6, Tulley teaches a supporting body that is capable of connecting the tubular body as claimed (Figures 1 and 2, any element capable of performing the function, including (5) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)).
As to claims 7 and 8, the nozzle of Tulley is capable of being utilized in combination with a heating target object having the structures as claimed. As such, the scope of the claims is met by the nozzle of Tulley.
Claims 1-3 and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kondo et al. (US 2013/0313760).
Regarding claim 1, Kondo et al. teach auxiliary molding equipment/pipe (13) (paragraphs [0054] and [0062]) that is capable of heating a bottomed tubular heating target object (Figures 1-3 (4) (4a) (4b) (11) (12); paragraphs [0054], [0062], [0089] and [0090]) in a heating passage with an autoclave (1) to mold a molding target object, the autoclave (1) including the heating passage including an inlet port into which a heating gas flows and an outlet port from which the heating gas flows out (Figures 1 and 2 (5) (9) (10)), the heating target object including the molding target object and an opening (note: the limitations directed to the heating target object and the autoclave are interpreted as set forth above in the section 112b rejection), the auxiliary molding equipment comprising a tubular body including a first end opening (Figures 1, 4, 5, 7 (13) – guide pipe), a second end opening located at an opposite side of the first end opening (Figures 1, 4, 5, 7 (13) – the opposite end of (13)), and an internal passage through which the first end opening and the second end opening communicate with each other (Figures 1, 4, 5 and 7 (13); paragraph [0054]), wherein the tubular body includes a first tubular portion that includes the first end opening (Figures 1, 4, 5 and 7 (13)) and is capable of being located in an internal space of the heating target object and a second tubular portion that includes the second end opening, is capable of being located so as to project to an outside of the heating target object through the opening of the heating target object, and has an outer shape expanding toward the second end opening (Figures 1, 4, 5 and 7 (13)).
As to claim 2, Kondo et al. teach the second end opening ((13) – funnel shape end; paragraphs [0054] and [0062]) is larger than the first end opening ((13) – cylindrical end).
As to claim 3, Kondo et al. teach the outer shape of the second tubular portion when viewed as claimed is a funnel shape as claimed (13) (paragraphs [0054] and [0062]).
As to claim 6, Kondo et al. teach a supporting body that is capable of connecting the tubular body as claimed (paragraph [0054]).
As to claims 7 and 8, the pipe (13) of Kondo et al. is capable of being utilized in combination with a heating target object having the structures as claimed and is positioned within jig ((4) (4a) (4b); paragraphs [0054], [0062], [0089] and [0090]).
As to claim 9, Kondo et al. teach the auxiliary molding equipment/pipe (13) as set forth in claim 1 and further include an autoclave (1) with an inlet port and an outlet port as claimed (Figures 1 and 2 (5) (9) (10)).
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondo et al. (US 2013/0313760), as applied to claims 1-3 and 6-9 above, and further in view of Jackson et al. (US 2010/0186899).
As to claim 4, Kondo et al. teach the auxiliary molding equipment as set forth above. Kondo et al. do not teach the equipment includes a projection on an outer peripheral surface of the first tubular portion. However, Jackson et al. disclose analogous molding equipment wherein the equipment includes a projection on an outer peripheral surface as claimed (Figure 2 (13) attached to (10)/(11)).
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 Kondo et al. and Jackson et al. and to have included a projection on an outer peripheral surface of the equipment (13) of Kondo et al., as suggested by Jackson et al., for the purpose, as suggested by Jackson et al. of facilitating the connecting/supporting/sealing of the equipment to the molding/heating/jig equipment.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondo et al. (US 2013/0313760), as applied to claims 1-3 and 6-9 above, and further in view of Lemelson (US 3,875,275).
As to claim 5, Kondo et al. teach the auxiliary molding equipment as set forth above. Kondo et al. do not teach the equipment includes at least one hole open in a radial direction of the first tubular portion. However, Lemelson discloses analogous molding equipment wherein the equipment includes at least one hole open in a radial direction of the first tubular portion (Figure 1 (26) and (27))
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 Kondo et al. and Lemelson and to have included a at least one hole open in a radial direction of the first tubular portion of the equipment (13) of Kondo et al., as suggested by Lemelson, for the purpose, as suggested by Lemelson of facilitating the flow of heat transfer material/gas within the body.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Leduc (US 5,364,602) discloses analogous auxiliary equipment/venturi outlet (46) for use with autoclave (10).
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