DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim(s) 1-10,12-14 and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Youtsey et al. (4,196,607). Regarding claims 1,2,9,10,12 and 13, Youtsey discloses a die box (10) and a drawing die holder (36) comprising a drawing channel within a drawing die (38) through which tube (12’) passes as it is drawn into a tube product (12). Youtsey discloses at least one die probe channel (Fig. 3; col. 4, lines 9-11) in the drawing die holder (36) perpendicular to the drawing channel (Fig. 3), extending from an outer wall (outer circumference; Fig. 2) to an inner wall (at 54; Fig. 2) of the drawing die holder, within which a probe (14) comprising a transducer body (60) and probe head (70) is located. The probe (14) is an ultrasonic transducer (col. 3, lines 10-15) that is configured to receive ultrasonic vibrations. Regarding claims 3,4,6 and 8, Youtsey discloses a first base (die holder 36, right side portion; Fig. 3) which is contacting and supporting a first cap (44) so that the die (38) is held in the die holder (col. 3, lines 52- 54), the first base including the die probe channel to position the probe (14). Regarding claims 5 and 7, Youtsey discloses a second base (die holder 36, left side portion; Fig. 3) which is contacting shims (40; col. 3, lines 50-51) and is structured to hold the die (38) within the recess (36’). Regarding claim 14, the probe (14) is in direct contact with the die (col. 4, lines 19-22). Regarding claim 16, the probe is in a fixed position (threaded into) the probe channel (col. 4, lines 10-11). Regarding claims 17-19, the probe channel (Fig. 3) includes a conductive filling comprising silver electrode paint (col. 4, lines 22-25) and an overlying coating (72) which is an ultrasonic coupler (col. 4, lines 26-28). The conductive filling is in contact with the die (38) and in contact with the probe crystal (70; Fig. 3).
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) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Youtsey et al. (4,196,607) in view of Hagglund (4,573,336). Youtsey discloses radiation sensing but 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 probe channel of Youtsey 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 Youtsey et al. (4,196,607) in view of Beller et al. (DE 4019865). Youtsey 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 8-13-2025 have been fully considered. Applicant’s amendment overcomes the double patenting rejection of the previous office action. Regarding the art rejection, Applicant argues (response 8-13-2025; page 1, paragraph 4, lines 1-3) that there is not an explicit teaching of a probe channel. Youtsey (Fig. 1) shows that a plurality of transducer probes (14) are protruding through a die box (10) to an exterior where they connect with measuring means (18). A die holder (36; Fig. 3) in the die box (10) holds a die (38) and the die holder (36) has a threaded probe channel (explicitly recited; col. 4, line 11) which houses a transducer body (60) of the transducer probe (14). The threaded probe channel extends from an inner wall of the die holder (at drawing die area 54; col. 4, lines 1-3) to an outer wall (outer periphery; col. 4, lines 14-15) of the drawing die holder (36) and the probes (14) are shown extending out of the die box (10; Fig. 1) to connect to the measuring means (col. 4, lines 16-18).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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