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
Claims 9-37 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 06/22/2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1-8 in the reply filed on 06/22/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that:
The Applicant submits that Groups I-V include only claims directed to a process and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process as set forth in 37 C.F.R. 1.475(b). Particularly, the claims are directed to a die assemblies configured to cool an extruded profile, a method for cooling an extruded profile using a die assembly, and systems for cooling an extruded profile using a die assembly.
This is not found persuasive because “an extruded profile” is not recited in the independent claim 1.
Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive.
While German Patent Document No. DE 102019001144 ("Jurgen") may include a coolant discharge (13), Jurgen is completely silent as to the structure of "an internal cavity extending from the inflow end to the outflow end; [and] an internal mandrel disposed within the internal cavity." Jurgen does not address such structures, because Jurgen is instead directed to a blowing head for the production of a blown film which does not include an internal mandrel disposed in an internal cavity, around which a material is shaped. As such, the above identified common technical feature constitutes a significant, novel contribution over the prior art.
This is not found persuasive because “around which a material is shaped” is not recited in the independent claim 1; and
The claim is rejected as filed; and the prior art of Jurgen discloses:
a die assembly (figs.1-3) (paragraphs 0026-0032) comprising:
an inflow end (figs.1-3: the top end of element (2) at melt feed (4));
an outflow end opposite the inflow end (figs.1-3: the top end of element (2) at melt outlet (6));
an internal cavity (figs.2-3: (16)) extending from the inflow end to the outflow end;
an internal mandrel (figs.2-3: (9)) disposed within the internal cavity, the internal mandrel having an end proximate to the outflow end of the die assembly (figs.2-3: the top end of the element (9) proximate to outlet (6)); and
an internal cooling channel (figs.2-3: ((11), (12), (13, and (14)) within the internal mandrel, the internal cooling channel having an outlet (figs.2-3: (13)) disposed at or near the end of the internal mandrel.
Another prior art, Sadahide (JPH1076312A) discloses a die assembly (figs.1-3) (paragraphs 0013-0027) comprising:
an inflow end (fig.3: (14));
an outflow end opposite the inflow end (fig.3: the left end of element (1) that opposite to the element (14));
an internal cavity (fig.3: (10)) extending from the inflow end to the outflow end;
an internal mandrel (fig.3: (11)) disposed within the internal cavity, the internal mandrel having an end proximate to the outflow end of the die assembly (fig.3: the left end of the element (11)); and
an internal cooling channel (fig.3: (17)) within the internal mandrel, the internal cooling channel having an outlet (figs.2-3: (13)) disposed at or near the end of the internal mandrel.
And another prior art, Takashi (JPH06198326A) discloses a die assembly (fig.1) (paragraphs 0014-0030) comprising:
an inflow end (fig.1: the left end at element (6));
an outflow end opposite the inflow end ((fig.1: the right end at element (E));
an internal cavity (fig.1: (14)) extending from the inflow end to the outflow end;
an internal mandrel (fig.1: (16)) disposed within the internal cavity, the internal mandrel having an end proximate to the outflow end of the die assembly (fig.1: the end at element (25)); and
an internal cooling channel (fig.1: (26)) within the internal mandrel, the internal cooling channel having an outlet (fig.1: (26)) disposed at or near the end of the internal mandrel.
Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because poor quality and difficult to recognize the details.
Examiner requests a clean copy of the drawings with well-defined lines and preferably with typed numbers so that the drawings are clear and can be easily compared to the rest of the disclosure. Examiner requested a copy of the drawings with no solid shading area. Examiner requests a copy of cross sections drawings without shading.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 7 , the phrase “the die assembly includes two or more internal mandrels disposed within the internal cavity, the two or more internal mandrels” should be changed to “the die assembly includes two or more of the internal mandrel disposed within the internal cavity, the two or more of the internal mandrel”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Jurgen (DE102019001144A1 attached NPL, English Machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Jurgen discloses a die assembly (figs.1-3) (paragraphs 0026-0032) comprising:
an inflow end (figs.1-3: the top end of element (2) at melt feed (4));
an outflow end opposite the inflow end (figs.1-3: the top end of element (2) at melt outlet (6));
an internal cavity (figs.2-3: (16)) extending from the inflow end to the outflow end;
an internal mandrel (figs.2-3: (9)) disposed within the internal cavity, the internal mandrel having an end proximate to the outflow end of the die assembly (figs.2-3: the top end of the element (9) proximate to outlet (6)); and
an internal cooling channel (figs.2-3: ((11), (12), (13, and (14)) within the internal mandrel, the internal cooling channel having an outlet (figs.2-3: (13)) disposed at or near the end of the internal mandrel.
Regarding claim 2, Jurgen discloses wherein the internal cooling channel includes another outlet (figs.2-3: (12)) disposed at the outflow end of the die assembly.
Claims 1, 3-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Sadahide (JPH1076312A attached NPL, English Machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Sadahide discloses a die assembly (figs.1-3) (paragraphs 0013-0027) comprising:
an inflow end (fig.3: (14));
an outflow end opposite the inflow end (fig.3: the end that opposite to the element (14));
an internal cavity (fig.3: (10)) extending from the inflow end to the outflow end;
an internal mandrel (fig.3: (11)) disposed within the internal cavity, the internal mandrel having an end proximate to the outflow end of the die assembly (fig.3); and
an internal cooling channel (fig.3: (17)) within the internal mandrel, the internal cooling channel having an outlet (fig.3) disposed at or near the end of the internal mandrel.
Regarding claim 3, Sadahide discloses a bridge (fig.3: (4)) connecting the internal mandrel to an interior surface of the die assembly, the interior surface of the die assembly being formed by the internal cavity (fig.3).
Regarding claim 4, Sadahide discloses wherein the internal cooling channel extends from an inlet disposed on an exterior surface of the die assembly to the outlet, such that the internal cooling channel extends through the die assembly, the bridge, and the internal mandrel (figs.2-3).
Regarding claim 6, Sadahide discloses an insulator lining an interior of the internal cooling channel (paragraph 0022).
Claim 1-5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Takashi (JPH06198326A attached NPL, English Machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Takashi discloses a die assembly (fig.1) (paragraphs 0014-0030) comprising:
an inflow end (fig.1: the left end at element (6));
an outflow end opposite the inflow end ((fig.1: the right end at element (E));
an internal cavity (fig.1: (14)) extending from the inflow end to the outflow end;
an internal mandrel (fig.1: (16)) disposed within the internal cavity, the internal mandrel having an end proximate to the outflow end of the die assembly (fig.1: the end at element (25)); and
an internal cooling channel (fig.1: (26)) within the internal mandrel, the internal cooling channel having an outlet (fig.1: (26)) disposed at or near the end of the internal mandrel.
Regarding claim 2, Takashi discloses wherein the internal cooling channel includes another outlet (fig.1: (25)) disposed at the outflow end of the die assembly.
Regarding claim 3, Takashi discloses a bridge (figs.1-2: (17)) connecting the internal mandrel to an interior surface of the die assembly, the interior surface of the die assembly being formed by the internal cavity (figs.1-2) (paragraphs 0016-0020).
Regarding claim 4, Takashi discloses wherein the internal cooling channel extends from an inlet (figs.1-2: (24)) disposed on an exterior surface of the die assembly to the outlet, such that the internal cooling channel extends through the die assembly, the bridge, and the internal mandrel (figs.1-2).
Regarding claim 5, Takashi discloses wherein: the inlet of the internal cooling channel is configured to receive a fluid into the internal cooling channel; the internal cooling channel is configured to allow the fluid to flow through the internal cooling channel within the die assembly, the bridge, and the internal mandrel to the outlet (paragraphs 0016-0020); and
the outlet is configured to disperse the fluid out of the internal cooling channel to cool an interior channel of an extruded profile (fig.1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Sadahide (JPH1076312A attached NPL, English Machine translation).
Regarding claim 7, Sadahide does not disclose wherein the die assembly includes two or more internal mandrels disposed within the internal cavity, the two or more internal mandrels being connected to an interior surface of the die assembly by one or more bridges, the interior surface of the die assembly being formed by the internal cavity.
However, Sadahide discloses a bridge (fig.3: (4)) connecting the internal mandrel to an interior surface of the die assembly, the interior surface of the die assembly being formed by the internal cavity (fig.3);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to Sadahide to add internal mandrels and bridges as many times as needed, including wherein the die assembly includes two or more internal mandrels disposed within the internal cavity, the two or more internal mandrels being connected to an interior surface of the die assembly by one or more bridges, the interior surface of the die assembly being formed by the internal cavity, in order to increase productivity (MPEP 2144.04 VI, B).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Takashi (JPH06198326A attached NPL, English Machine translation).
Regarding claim 7, Takashi does not disclose wherein the die assembly includes two or more internal mandrels disposed within the internal cavity, the two or more internal mandrels being connected to an interior surface of the die assembly by one or more bridges, the interior surface of the die assembly being formed by the internal cavity.
However, Takashi discloses Regarding claim 3, Takashi discloses a bridge (figs.1-2: (17)) connecting the internal mandrel to an interior surface of the die assembly, the interior surface of the die assembly being formed by the internal cavity (figs.1-2) (paragraphs 0016-0020).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to Takashi to add internal mandrels and bridges as many times as needed, including wherein the die assembly includes two or more internal mandrels disposed within the internal cavity, the two or more internal mandrels being connected to an interior surface of the die assembly by one or more bridges, the interior surface of the die assembly being formed by the internal cavity, in order to increase productivity (MPEP 2144.04 VI, B).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Takashi (JPH06198326A attached NPL, English Machine translation) in view of Amba (US20200143987A1).
Regarding claim 8, Takashi does not disclose a temperature sensor channel extending into the die assembly from an opening on an exterior surface of the die assembly, the temperature sensor channel configured to accommodate a temperature sensor.
Amba teaches a temperature sensor channel extending into the die assembly, the temperature sensor channel configured to accommodate a temperature sensor (paragraph 0034).
Both of the prior arts of Takashi and Amba are related to an extruder having a cooling channel;
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Takashi to have temperature sensor channel configured to accommodate a temperature sensor as taught by Amba in order to maintain desired temperatures (Amba : paragraph 0034); thereby having a temperature sensor channel extending into the die assembly from an opening on an exterior surface of the die assembly, the temperature sensor channel configured to accommodate a temperature sensor.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED S ALAWADI whose telephone number is (571)272-2224. The examiner can normally be reached 08:00 am- 05:00 pm.
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, CHRISTOPHER 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.
/MOHAMMED S. ALAWADI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights