Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/856,810

CONTROL METHOD OF LAMINATE MOLDING SYSTEM AND LAMINATE MOLDING SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Oct 14, 2024
Examiner
TENTONI, LEO B
Art Unit
1742
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
The Japan Steel Works, Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
1134 granted / 1386 resolved
+16.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
1413
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
48.3%
+8.3% vs TC avg
§102
20.7%
-19.3% vs TC avg
§112
19.0%
-21.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1386 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. In claim 6, line 3, the expression “can be” renders the claim indefinite because it is not clear if the chamber is, or is not, depressurized. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hoshika (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0182462 A1). Regarding claim 1, Hoshika (see the entire document, in particular, paragraphs [0001], [0052], [0058], [0062] and [0067]; Figure 2) teaches a process (see paragraph [0001] (method for reducing the thickness of an absorbent body) of Hoshika), in which at least two press apparatuses are consecutively provided and a laminate molded product having been pressure-molded by a press apparatus in a previous step is further pressure-molded by a press apparatus in a subsequent step (see Figure 2, paragraphs [0062] (main pressing device 30, including pressing devices 31, 35, 37), [0067] (auxiliary pressing device 50) and [0052] (layered body 3 (i.e., laminate molded product)) of Hoshika), wherein a physical quantity during pressure-molding or after pressure-molding by the press apparatus in the previous step is measured, and the physical quantity is used to control the press apparatus in the subsequent step (see Figure 2, paragraph [0058] (thickness sensor 70 outputs measurement information (thickness) at a position between main pressing device 30 and auxiliary pressing device 50, and a controller 90 that sets the size of gap G50 between rollers 50a, 50b of auxiliary pressing device 50) of Hoshika). Regarding claims 2 and 3, see Figure 2, paragraph [0058] (thickness sensor 70 outputs measurement information (thickness) at a position between main pressing device 30 and auxiliary pressing device 50, and a controller 90 that sets the size of gap G50 between rollers 50a, 50b of auxiliary pressing device 50) of Hoshika. Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hoshika (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0182462 A1). Regarding claim 4, Hoshika (see the entire document, in particular, paragraphs [0001], [0052], [0058], [0062], [0067] and [0068]; Figure 2) teaches an apparatus (see paragraph [0001] (apparatus for reducing the thickness of an absorbent body) of Hoshika), in which at least two press apparatuses are consecutively provided and a laminate molded product having been pressure-molded by a press apparatus in a previous step is further pressure-molded by a press apparatus in a subsequent step (see Figure 2, paragraph [0062] (main pressing device 30, including pressing devices 31, 35, 37), [0067] (auxiliary pressing device 50) and [0052] (layered body 3 (i.e., laminate molded product)) of Hoshika), including (a) a sensor configured to measure a physical quantity during pressure-molding or after pressure-molding by the press apparatus in the previous step (see Figure 2, paragraph [0058] (thickness sensor 70 outputs measurement information (thickness) at a position between main pressing device 30 and auxiliary pressing device 50, and a controller 90 that sets the size of gap G50 between rollers 50a, 50b of auxiliary pressing device 50) of Hoshika); and (b) a control apparatus configured to measure, using the sensor, a physical quantity during pressure-molding or after pressure-molding by the press apparatus in the previous step, store the physical quantity in a storage apparatus, and use the physical quantity to control the press apparatus in the subsequent step (see Figure 2, paragraph [0058] (controller 90 that sets the size of gap G50 between rollers 50a, 50b of auxiliary pressing device 50) of Hoshika). 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 5 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoshika (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0182462 A1) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Iwata et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2018/0162111 A1). Regarding claim 5, Hoshika does not teach (1) that the sensor is a position sensor configured to measure any of the recited distances. Iwata et al (see the entire document, in particular, paragraphs [0001], [0014], [0018], [0030], [0046] and [0055]; Figure 1) teaches an apparatus (see paragraph [0001] (laminating apparatus) of Iwata et al), including a sensor that is a position sensor configured to measure a distance between pressurization blocks (see paragraph [0018] (gap measuring device for measuring the distance between the pressing elements) of Iwata et al), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a sensor that is a position sensor configured to measure a distance between pressurization blocks in the apparatus of Hoshika in view of Iwata et al in order to control thickness of the product at a more precise level (see paragraph [0014] of Iwata et al). Regarding claim 6, see Figure 1, paragraphs [0030] (vacuum laminating apparatus), [0046] (servomotor 35) and [0055] (servomotor 25) of Iwata et al; Figure 2, paragraph [0068] (elevator motor 56) of Hoshika. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEO B. TENTONI whose telephone number is (571)272-1209. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-4:00 ET M-F. 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, Christina A. Johnson can be reached at (571)272-1176. 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. LEO B. TENTONI Primary Examiner Art Unit 1742 /LEO B TENTONI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 14, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603206
COMPOSITE COMPONENT AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599464
PRODUCTION OF DENTAL FLOSS FROM WOOD FIBERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601177
DECORATIVE CONCRETE WITH UNIFORM SURFACE AND METHOD OF FORMING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595594
BULKED CONTINUOUS CARPET FILAMENT MANUFACTURING FROM POLYTRIMETHYLENE TEREPHTHALATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592620
ROTOR CORE MOLDING METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MOLDING A ROTOR CORE OF AN ELECTRIC MOTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+9.9%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1386 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month