DETAILED ACTION
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5-12-2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 1 “probed” should be --probe--. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-10,12-14 and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lutterbach et al. (9,636,729) in view of Angelilli et al. (10,328,473). Lutterbach discloses a die box (56; Fig. 8) containing a drawing die assembly (10) including a drawing die holder (16,17; col. 6, lines 60-64) and a drawing die (14). A probe (20; col. 7, lines 9-10) is configured to measure a characteristic (col. 6, lines 58-60) of the die (14) and a workpiece (12) being drawn through a drawing channel (36) in the die (drawing direction, 35). Lutterbach discloses that a probe channel (26) for the probe (20) penetrates the drawing die holder (16,17; col. 3, lines 40-43 and col. 7, lines 15-16). The die probe channel (26) extends through an outer wall of the drawing die holder (17) at seal (28; Fig. 2; col. 7, lines 16-18) to an inner wall of the drawing die holder toward the die (14; Fig. 2). A bracing structure (32) for the probe (20) is on the drawing die holder (16; col. 4, lines 41-43 and col. 7, lines 29-31). Lutterbach does not disclose a second probe that measures a characteristic of the die box or a wire being drawn which is not in the die probe channel. Angelilli teaches a drawing die apparatus (1) for drawing an elongated workpiece (2) through a drawing die (6), the drawing die apparatus including a die holder (6’) with a probe (8; col. 4, lines 22-23) extending in a die probe channel (die structure) in the die holder (6’; Fig. 2a; col. 4, lines 1-4) to measure a characteristic of the die (6) or the elongated workpiece (2). Angelilli teaches a second probe (8”) which is configured to measure a characteristic of the workpiece (2), the second probe is not in the die probe channel (col. 5, lines 13-16) of the die (6). It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the drawing die assembly of Lutterbach to include a second probe which is not in the die probe channel of the die so that the detected signal is not affected by the die material.
Regarding claim 2, Lutterbach discloses that the die probe channel (26) is perpendicular to the drawing channel (Fig. 1).
Regarding claims 3,4,6 and 8, Lutterbach discloses that the drawing die holder (16,17) has a first base (17A) and a cap (17B; col. 6, lines 62-63), the die probe channel (26) is located within the first base (17A; Fig. 1).
Regarding claims 5 and 7, Lutterbach discloses a second base (39A; Fig. 1).
Regarding claims 9 and 10 Lutterbach discloses that the probe (20) is housed in the die probe channel (26) and is a vibration (ultrasound) probe (col. 7, lines 9-10).
Regarding claims 12 and 13, Lutterbach discloses that the drawing die assembly (10) includes a drawing die (14) for drawing an elongated workpiece (12).
Regarding claim 14, Lutterbach discloses that the probe (20) is in contact with the drawing die (14; Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 16, Lutterbach discloses that the probe (20) is in a fixed position with a bracing structure (32; col. 7, lines 32-36).
Regarding claims 17-19, Lutterbach discloses (col. 7, lines 19-28) that a conductive coupling medium (22) is in contact with the die (14) in a space (33) within a spacer (30) in the die probe channel (26) of the probe (20).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lutterbach et al. (9,636,729) in view of Angelilli et al. (10,328,473) and further in view of Hagglund (4,573,336). Lutterbach does not disclose a temperature sensing thermocouple. Hagglund teaches radiation sensing (10) in a wire drawing die (5) and that a die probe channel (TR, Fig. 4) is used to locate a thermocouple (col. 3, lines 39-41). It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to locate a thermocouple in the die holder of Lutterbach as taught by Hagglund in order to sense a die or workpiece temperature during the drawing operation.
Claim(s) 15 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lutterbach et al. (9,636,729) in view of Angelilli et al. (10,328,473) and further in view of Beller et al. (DE 4019865). Lutterbach does not disclose that the probe is spring pressured. Beller teaches that spring pressure (13) is applied on a probe (6) in a drawing die (2; Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to provide spring pressure on the probe of Youtsey as taught by Beller in order to press the probe into contact with the die.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5-12-2026 have been fully considered. The reference to Lutterbach discloses that at least one die probe channel extends from an outer wall to an inner wall of a drawing die holder (16,17) which is contained within a die box (56) and Angelilli teaches that a probe is not housed in a die probe channel that is within a drawing die holder. It is an obvious modification to provide a plurality of probes that are located within a die holder and not within a die holder to sense die and workpiece characteristics.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWARD THOMAS TOLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4525. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5.
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, Chris Templeton can be reached at 571-270-1477. 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.
/EDWARD T TOLAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725
