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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
1. 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.
2. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Suzuki et al. (6,305,209 B1), hereinafter Suzuki. Regarding claim 1, Suzuki teaches an electrode plate notching apparatus 41 (Figs. 6-9) comprising: a first mold comprising a punch hole (die 16 defining a die opening/punch hole; Figs. 1 and 6); a second mold configured to vertically move above the first mold and comprising a punch (blanking punch 7 mounted to upper die assembly 2; Figs. 1-4 and 6-9); a first body (set plate 22 and associated lower die set structure; Figs. 6-9) coupled to the first mold 3 and spaced apart from the punch hole 16; a second body (upper die assembly 2 including driver 28; Figs. 6-9) coupled to the second mold and facing the first body; a scrap pusher (cam roller 29 in operative engagement with slider 43, pusher 46, pressure pin 21, and counterpunch 20 forming a discharge-actuating assembly driven by upper die motion; Figs. 6-9) movably arranged in operative association with the second body and configured to discharge material W2 from the punch hole 16; and a trigger (cams 45 tiltably/rotatably, inherently via a pin or shaft, supported by cam retainer 44; Figs. 6-9) rotatably connected to the first body by a trigger shaft (cams 45 mounted via cam retainer 44 allowing tilting/rotation relative to lower die-side structure) and configured to move the scrap pusher in conjunction with vertical movement of the second body 2/28.
Suzuki teaches that vertical movement of upper die assembly 2 causes driver 28 and cam roller 29 to move vertically as part of the second body structure. During ascent of upper die assembly 2, cam roller 29 engages inclined surface 47 of slider 43, thereby translating vertical movement of the second body into horizontal displacement of slider 43 against spring 34. This movement causes cams 45 to tilt/rotate relative to cam retainer 44, thereby releasing pusher 46 such that the biasing force of counterpunch urging means 25 is transmitted through pressure pin 21 to counterpunch 20, which elevates and discharges material W2 out of die 16 (col. 8, line 65 through col. 9, line 49; Figs. 6-9). Accordingly, Suzuki discloses that the scrap pusher is not limited to a single component located solely on the second body, but rather comprises a cooperative discharge mechanism actuated by movement of the second body, including cam roller 29 as the initial driving interface, slider 43 as the motion-transmitting member, and pressure pin 21/counterpunch 20 as the discharge elements, all of which operate in response to vertical movement of upper die assembly 2 to expel material from the punch hole. It should be noted that the claim does not require the scrap pusher to be a single component that is solely arranged on the second body.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Kuk et al. (KR 102515516 B1), hereinafter Kuk, provided with the IDS submitted on 02/26/2025, in view of Sautter et al. (2003/0182981 A1), hereinafter Sautter. Regarding claim 1, Kuk teaches an electrode plate notching apparatus comprising: a first mold 20 comprising a punch hole 24; a second mold 32 configured to vertically move above the first mold 20 and comprising a punch 36; a first body 16 coupled to the first mold 20 and spaced apart from the punch hole 24; a second body 32, 34 coupled to the second mold 20 and facing the first body 16; a scrap pusher 120 movably arranged on the second body 32, 34 and configured to discharge a scrap S (Fig. 5) from the punch hole 24; and a trigger 110 arranged on the first body 16 and configured to move the scrap pusher 120 in conjunction with vertical movement of the second body 32. See Kuk, Figs. 1-6.
Kuk does not explicitly teach that the trigger 110 is rotatably connected to the first body by a trigger shaft.
However, Sautter teaches a pivotably mounted ejector lever 32 supported on a shaft/bolt 30 and configured to convert reciprocating press motion into controlled actuation of an ejector mechanism. See paragraphs [0030], [0046]-[0048], and Figs. 1-3 in Sautter. Sautter further teaches that the lever 32 is rotatable about the shaft and cooperates with follower elements to actuate an ejector system in synchronization with vertical press movement.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the trigger 110 of Kuk to be rotatably connected to the first body by a trigger shaft as taught by Sautter in order to improve durability and reduce wear in repeated press cycling. It should be noted that the modification constitutes a predictable substitution of a sliding or fixed trigger element with a pivotable shaft-mounted lever performing the same motion-synchronization function.
Regarding claim 2, Kuk further teaches a scrap pusher 120 configured to press and discharge scrap S from the punch hole 24 as the punch assembly moves. See Figs. 4-6 in Kuk. Kuk does not explicitly teach that the scrap pusher comprises a rotatable pusher body including a blade extending therefrom and a restoring member configured to rotate the pusher body in a reverse direction.
However, Sautter teaches a pivotable ejector lever 32 biased by a spring member 86 and configured to return to a starting position after actuation. See paragraphs [0034]-[0036], [0047]-[0048] in Sautter. Sautter further teaches follower engagement elements that transmit motion to an ejector system and allow return under spring bias after completion of an ejection stroke. It would have been obvious to modify the scrap pusher of Kuk to include a rotatable pusher body with a restoring member as taught by Sautter in order to enable automatic return after ejection.
Allowable Subject Matter
5. Claims 8-18 are allowed. Regarding claim 8, Kuk, McGill (0557,142), Quericia (7,360,475 B2), Harhay et al. (5,896,795), Suzuki, and Sautter alone or in combination fail to disclose the trigger comprises: a trigger body rotatably connected to the first body; a guide portion on the trigger body and configured to be brought into contact with the pusher body as the second body moves downward, and configured to rotate the trigger body in the forward direction; a hook on the trigger body and configured to be engaged with the pusher body as the trigger body is rotated in the reverse direction after the downward movement of the second body is completed; and a pressing member connected to the trigger body and configured to rotate the trigger body in the reverse direction.
Response to Arguments
6. Applicant argument that amendments to claim 1 overcome the rejection of the claims based on the prior art of the record is unpersuasive. As stated above, Suzuki alone and Kuk in view of Sautter teach the claimed subject matter.
Conclusion
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant’s disclosure.
Harhay et al. (5,896,795) and Schultz et al. (2,872,979) teach a notching apparatus with a waste material ejector.
8. 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.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GHASSEM ALIE whose telephone number is (571) 272-4501. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 am-5:00 pm EST.
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, Boyer Ashley can be reached on (571) 272-4502. 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.
/GHASSEM ALIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724
May 28, 2026
Prosecution Insights