DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Tabuchi Hiroyasu (KR-20250059441-A) (hereinafter "Hiroyasu") in view of Tagaya Riyousaku (JP-S58211635-A) (hereinafter "Riyousaku")
Regarding claim 1,
Hiroyasu discloses a mechanical property inspection device for inspecting a mechanical property of a molded article obtained by injection molding a resin material (paragraph 46), the mechanical property inspection device comprising:
a spectral image acquisition section that acquires spectral images for a plurality of spectral wavelengths for the molded article. Hiroyasu teaches an image acquisition section (10) and imaging means (12) that capture images of the resin molded article using specific wavelength filtering (paragraph [0011], [0046]).
However, Hiroyasu does not explicitly teach acquiring multiple spectral images across a plurality of spectral wavelengths, In the same field of endeavor, Riyousaku teaches structural components that filter transmitted light into multiple distinct wavelength regions, thereby obtaining multi-wavelength spectral signals for the inspected article, specifically disclosing "three distinct wavelengths of light energy (optical signals)" using "three optical filter means" (claim 1). It would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to incorporate the multi-wavelength filtering of Riyousaku into the imaging system of Hiroyasu to obtain high-precision spectral images across multiple wavelengths.
Hiroyasu further teaches a spectral calculation section that calculates the spectral spectrum at a plurality of measurement points of the molded article from the spectral images for a plurality of the spectral wavelengths. Hiroyasu teaches analyzing localized light intensity values from captured images (paragraph [0047]).
However, Hiroyasu does not explicitly teach a spectral calculation section configured to calculate a full spectral spectrum at multiple measurement points, Riyousaku teaches using multiple photodetectors, amplifiers, and comparative circuitry to process the distinct wavelength signals, thereby executing the function of calculating and comparing spectral values (claim 1). It would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to apply the spectral calculation techniques of Riyousaku to the localized measurement points of Hiroyasu to obtain detailed spectral distribution data across the molded article.
Hiroyasu and Riyousaku further teach a characteristic value calculation section that calculates a spectral characteristic value at a predetermined spectral wavelength in the spectral spectrum at a plurality of the measurement points. Hiroyasu teaches detecting localized intensity variations in the captured image to identify defects (paragraph [0050]). Riyousaku teaches calculating specific differences between transmittance values at selected, predetermined wavelengths, which satisfies the function of calculating a spectral characteristic value at multiple points (claim 1). It would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to combine these teachings to calculate a spectral characteristic value at a predetermined wavelength from the calculated spectrum at each measurement point to identify localized material variations.
Hiroyasu and Riyousaku further teach a mechanical property estimation section that estimates the mechanical property of the molded article based on the spectral characteristic value. Hiroyasu teaches a processing unit that inspects physical states (like structural thickness or crystalline variations) using light intensity (paragraph [0011], [0047]). Riyousaku teaches estimating the quality of the inspected article based on the comparison of calculated spectral characteristic values to preset thresholds (claim 1). It would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to utilize the spectral characteristic values to estimate the mechanical properties (such as structural integrity or thickness-related strength) of the molded article as suggested by Hiroyasu 's defect inspection.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Hiroyasu in view of Riyousaku, and further in view of Zhang Xin (JP 2021151744-A) (hereinafter Xin").
Regarding claim 5
Hiroyasu discloses an acceptability determination section (inspection unit 22) for judging whether or not the molded article is a non-defective article based on an estimation result of the mechanical property by the mechanical property estimation section. Specifically, Hiroyasu teaches that the processing unit (20) and inspection unit (22) analyze physical characteristics, such as thickness variation and crystallization changes, through fluorescence intensity measurements, and classify the molded articles as defective or non-defective based on these measurements (paragraph [0029], [0030]-[0031]).
Furthermore, in the same field of endeavor, Xin teaches an abnormality determination unit that evaluates and determines the defect status of molded articles based on regional importance weighting (paragraph [0023], [0032]). It would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to combine the regional weighting of Xin with the inspection system of Hiroyasu to optimize processing loads and improve the accuracy of the acceptability determination.
Claims 6, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Hiroyasu in view of Riyousaku, further in view of Xin and further in view of Kobayashi YOJI et al. (JP-H01120317-A) (hereinafter "YOJI"),.
Regarding claim 6
The combination of Hiroyasu, Riyousaku, and Xin disclose an injection molding system comprising: the mechanical property inspection device according to claim 1; Xin further explicitly discloses an injection molding machine (1) and its essential components (such as a screw, cylinder, and heater) working to inject material into a mold to form a molded article (paragraph [0016], [0017]).
Hiroyasu does not explicitly disclose the injection molding machine automatically adjusting its conditions, In the same field of endeavor, YOJI. teaches a complete closed-loop feedback system where image-based evaluation results (polarization fringe patterns representing internal stress or defects) are processed to generate correction signals, which the machine controller then uses to adjust molding process conditions (such as resin temperature, injection speed, and holding pressure) (YOJI, Claim 1). It would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to integrate the feedback control of YOJI with the inspection device of Hiroyasu to automatically adjust injection molding conditions based on the estimated mechanical properties, thereby reducing defect rates and eliminating manual operator adjustments.
Regarding claim 9
Hiroyasu discloses a foreign matter detection section configured to detect foreign matter contained in the molded article based on the spectral image. Specifically, Hiroyasu teaches an inspection unit that processes wavelength-specific image data (fluorescence intensity captured in specific wavelength bands, excluding the excitation wavelength) to identify defects and structural anomalies (such as burrs) in resin molded articles (paragraph [0030]-[0031], [0034]). This image processing based on filtered light intensity effectively fulfills the functional requirement of a foreign matter detection section analyzing spectral images.
Furthermore, Riyousaku teaches the optical detection of foreign matter within molded containers using multi-wavelength spectral measurements and comparators (claim 1). It would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to combine these teachings to enhance the foreign matter detection capabilities of the injection molding system.
Regarding claim 10
Hiroyasu discloses a shape inspection section configured to inspect a shape of the molded article based on the spectral image. Specifically, Hiroyasu teaches an inspection or processing unit (22) that evaluates the shape or structure of a resin molded article based on light intensity in captured images, identifying deviations in shape, contours, or molding defects from the image data (paragraph [0041], [0046]-[0047]).
Furthermore, Xin teaches an automated system for inspecting the external appearance of molded articles using image information and a calculation/processing unit to detect defects (paragraph [0023], [0025]). It would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to apply the appearance and shape inspection techniques of Xin to the spectral images of Hiroyasu to provide robust, automated shape inspection of the molded articles.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4, and 7-8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS PHAM whose telephone number is (571) 572‐3689. The examiner can normally be reached Monday ‐ Thursday 7 AM ‐ 4 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.
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.
/THOMAS K PHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights