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 .
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ganzer et al. (US Pub. No.: 2009/0188604 A1) (hereinafter Ganzer) and further in view of Weinmann et al. (US Pub. No.: 2018/0221914 A1) (hereinafter Weinmann).
Regarding claim 1, Ganzer discloses a glue application apparatus (10), comprising: an outer housing (12), wherein a first end (56) of the outer housing is provided with a first opening (Fig. 2), and a second end (22) opposite to the first end is provided with a glue injection hole (58); and an inner housing (14), wherein the inner housing is accommodated in the outer housing (Fig. 2), an end (72) of the inner housing close to the first opening is a third end, a flow channel (94, 96) exists between the inner housing and the outer housing (Fig. 2A), and the third end (72) of the inner housing and an opening face of the first opening (56) form a glue outlet (102), so that a colloid flows from the glue injection hole (58) to the glue outlet (102) through the flow channel (94, 96). Ganzer is silent about wherein the flow channel is continuous around an entire perimeter of the inner housing, as viewed in a plane view directed from the first end toward the second end of the outer housing.
Weinmann also discloses a glue application apparatus. The apparatus has inner (130) and outer housing (120) with flow channel (near 302) that is continuous around an entire perimeter of the inner housing (Fig. 3D-Fig. 4). The benefit of doing so would have been dispense a continuous resin around perimeter of final product (156).
Given the wealth of knowledge, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize Weinmann glue application apparatus within the Ganzer. The benefit of doing so would have been to apply continuous glue around the perimeter of the final product and obtain tighter seal.
Regarding claim 2, Ganzer discloses wherein the third end and the opening face of the first opening are in a same plane (Fig. 2A – near 102, 56).
Regarding claim 3, Ganzer discloses wherein the third end is provided with a second opening having a rectangular shape, the inner housing having a rectangular frame-shape surrounding the second opening, as viewed in the plan view directed from the first end toward the second end of the outer housing (Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 4, Ganzer discloses wherein an opening face of the second opening and the opening face of the first opening are in a same plane (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Ganzer discloses wherein the glue application apparatus further comprises a restraint structure (82, 97), and the outer housing and the inner housing are connected through the restraint structure (Fig. 2-3).
Regarding claim 6, Ganzer discloses wherein the restraint structure is configured to define the flow channel (Fig. 8 -notice the flow path 70).
Regarding claim 7, Ganzer discloses wherein the restraint structure is disposed on an inner surface of the outer housing, and the restraint structure is connected to an outer surface of the inner housing (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 8, Ganzer discloses the restraint structure (82) is bonded to the outer surface of the inner housing (14) (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 9, Ganzer discloses wherein the restraint structure (82) is disposed on an outer surface of the inner housing (14) (Fig. 3), and the restraint structure is connected to an inner surface of the outer housing (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 10, Ganzer discloses the restraint structure (82) is bonded to the outer surface of the inner housing (14) (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 11, Ganzer discloses wherein the restraint structure comprises a restraint member (82) and a connecting portion (97), and the restraint member is connected to the connecting portion, so as to connect the outer housing with the inner housing (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 12, Ganzer discloses wherein the restraint member is disposed on an inner surface of the outer housing (12) (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 13, Ganzer discloses wherein the restraint member is a nut (82), and the connecting portion is a bolt (97). (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 14, Ganzer discloses wherein the nut is disposed on an inner surface of the outer housing, the inner housing comprises a first fixing hole (84), and the nut is connected to the bolt through the first fixing hole (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 15, Ganzer discloses wherein the nut is disposed on an outer surface of the inner housing (Fig. 3), the outer housing comprises a second fixing hole (Fig. 8), and the nut is connected to the bolt through the second fixing hole (Fig. 8 -notice bolt 97 extends through outer housing (12).
Regarding claim 16, Ganzer discloses wherein the outer housing, the inner housing, and the restraint structure are integrally formed (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 17, Ganzer discloses wherein the outer housing comprises a first wall (54), the first wall is disposed opposite to the first opening, and the glue injection hole (58) is disposed on the first wall (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 18, Ganzer discloses wherein the glue outlet is in a shape of hollow rectangle (Fig. 6)
Regarding claim 20, Ganzer discloses wherein the restraint structure (97) is disposed on inner surfaces of four side walls of the outer housing or outer surfaces of four side walls of the inner housing (Fig. 6; ¶0046).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weinmann and Ganzer and as applied to claims 1-18 and 20 above, and further in view of Zhong-Shan Zhu (CN 211389841 U) (hereinafter Zhu).
Regarding claims 19, the limitations of claims 1-18 and 20 are taught by Ganzer. Ganzer is silent about hose.
Zhu also discloses a glue application apparatus. The apparatus discloses the use glue
injection hose (Abstract). The benefit of doing so would have been to provide more flexibility to glue injection apparatus.
Given the wealth of knowledge, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize hose as taught by Zhu within the apparatus as taught by Ganzer. The benefit of doing so would have been to provide more flexibility to glue application apparatus.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 06/05/2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
/VISHAL I PATEL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746
Prosecution Insights