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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/28/2025 has been considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 4-17, in the reply filed on 2/13/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-3 and 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/13/2026.
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.
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yao (JPS5557438A; of record, further translation provided).
Regarding claim 4, Yao (JPS5557438A; of record, further translation provided) teaches a mold for an apparatus for forming a polymeric product (Figures 2-4), the mold comprising:
an outer component (block 3 in Figures 2-3) defining a first inner cavity having a first diameter (Figures 2-3, block 3 having inner cavity for split mold elements 4, 4a); and
an inner component (split mold elements 4, 4a) configured to be disposed at least partially inside the first inner cavity of the outer component (as shown in Figures 2-3, split mold elements are disposed within block 3), the inner component having an inner surface which defines a second inner cavity (cavity 35 in Figure 2) having a second diameter smaller than the first diameter (Figures 2-3, diameter of cavity 35 is smaller than diameter of inner cavity of block 3), the inner component comprising:
a first subcomponent (split mold element 4) having a first inner surface (first half of cavity); and
a second subcomponent (split mold element 4a) having a second inner surface (second half of cavity),
wherein the first and second subcomponents are configured to couple together (Figure 4), and the first and second inner surfaces are configured to define the second inner cavity for receiving a polymeric material during molding of the polymeric product (as shown in Figures 1-4, cavity 35 forms container body 1).
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.
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao, in view of Dega (US 3,647,337).
Regarding claim 17, Yao teaches all the elements of claim 4, but does not disclose at least one of the outer component or the inner component is made of one or more of: stainless steel, nitrogen-enhanced duplex stainless steel, molybdenum-type high-speed steel, nickel, or nickel-iron alloy. However, the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
Dega discloses a molding apparatus (Figures 1-4), wherein the molds are made of stainless steel in order to prevention distortion die to thermal cycling (col. 4, lines 25-28). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide at least one of the outer component or the inner component in stainless steel, since it have held to be within the ordinary skill of worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use. One would have been motivated to use stainless steel for the purpose of strength (i.e., preventing distortion due to thermal cycling), as disclosed by Dega.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5- are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim
“…the inner component further comprising a third subcomponent having a third inner surface, wherein the first, second, and third subcomponents are configured to couple together, and the first, second, and third inner surfaces are configured to define the second inner cavity” with respect to claim 5;
“…the outer component comprising an outer elongate portion and an outer flange portion extending radially outwardly from the outer elongate portion” with respect to claim 8; and
“…wherein the second inner cavity has a first end having one opening and a second end having a plurality of openings” with respect to claim 12.
The closest prior art, Yao (JPS5557438A), discloses a mold for an apparatus for forming a polymeric product (Figures 2-4), the mold comprising: an outer component (block 3 in Figures 2-3) defining a first inner cavity having a first diameter (Figures 2-3, block 3 having inner cavity for split mold elements 4, 4a); and an inner component (split mold elements 4, 4a) configured to be disposed at least partially inside the first inner cavity of the outer component (as shown in Figures 2-3, split mold elements are disposed within block 3), the inner component having an inner surface which defines a second inner cavity (cavity 35 in Figure 2) having a second diameter smaller than the first diameter (Figures 2-3, diameter of cavity 35 is smaller than diameter of inner cavity of block 3). Further, the inner component comprises a first subcomponent (split mold element 4) having a first inner surface (first half of cavity); and a second subcomponent (split mold element 4a) having a second inner surface (second half of cavity), wherein the first and second subcomponents are configured to couple together (Figure 4), and the first and second inner surfaces are configured to define the second inner cavity for receiving a polymeric material during molding of the polymeric product (as shown in Figures 1-4, cavity 35 forms container body 1).
However, Yao fails to teach or suggest the inner component comprises a third subcomponent having a third inner surface, wherein the first, second, and third subcomponents are configured to couple together, and the first, second, and third inner surfaces are configured to define the second inner cavity; nor the outer component comprises an outer elongate portion and an outer flange portion extending radially outwardly from the outer elongate portion; nor the second inner cavity has a first end having one opening and a second end having a plurality of openings. As noted above, Yao discloses first and second subcomponents (4, 4a) which are configured to couple together to define the second inner cavity (35 in Figure 2). However, first and second subcomponents are configured to couple together laterally via railings (projections 43 in Figure 4). While it could be conceivable to provide a third subcomponent, a mere duplication of either first or second subcomponent would not be obvious for one skilled in the art due to the coupling means disclosed by Yao. Likewise, outer component (block 3) merely serves to retain first and second subcomponents (4, 4a) during molding; hence, one skilled in the art would neither benefit from nor look to providing the block with an outer elongate portion and an outer flange portion extending radially outwardly from the outer elongate portion. Further, as shown in Figure 4, Yao discloses the second inner cavity comprises a first end having singular opening (for receiving male mold 32) and a second end having a singular opening (for receiving die 61), both of which are required to mold the object (1 in Figure 1); hence, one skilled in the art would not look to nor benefit from providing either end of the second inner cavity with a plurality of openings as claimed. As disclosed in the current application, a mold for an apparatus for forming a polymeric product having the specific structure allows for pieces of the mold to separated and assembled easier for coating thereof (paragraph 0005 of the instant Specification).
Claims 6-7, 9-11 and 13-16 would be allowable at least for depending on claims 5, 8 and 12, respectively .
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Virak Nguon whose telephone number is (571)272-4196. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday (and alternate Fridays) 7:30-5:00.
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, Alison L Hindenlang can be reached at 571-270-7001. 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.
/VIRAK NGUON/Examiner, Art Unit 1741 4/15/2026
Prosecution Insights