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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 09, 2025, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a mold clamping device” in claim 1
“an injection device” in claim 1
“an air-driven clamper device” in claim 1
“an air-driven platen drop preventing device” in claim 1
“an air-driven shut-off nozzle device” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 – 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YAO, Guo-qing (CN-2931071-Y; “YAO”), in view of OMOBAYASHI TAKAHIDE (JP 2008105185 A; “OMOBAYASHI”).
Regarding claim 1, YAO teaches a injection molding machine (“vertical air-actuated plastic injection machine” lines 89 – 94) comprising:
a mold clamping device configured to clamp a mold (“pneumatic opening/clamping” lines 118 – 120, line 125, lines 163 – 165, lines 180 – 185);
an injection device configured to inject an injection material (lines 170 – 174, lines 191 – 194); and
a plurality of air drive devices (e.g., pneumatic injection mechanism lines 170 – 174, pneumatic opening/clamping lines 180 – 185, bar pneumatic branch lines 265 – 270);
wherein the air drive devices include at least two of:
an air-driven clamper device (“pneumatic opening/clamping” lines 118 – 120, line 125, lines 163 – 165, lines 180 – 185) mounted on the mold clamping device and configured to clamp and unclamp a mold (lines 302 – 312); and
an air-driven shut-off nozzle device (e.g., injection plunger rod 212, FIG. 6) adapted to be provided in the injection device (lines 107 – 110 “The described bar pneumatic branch that moves back comprises injection/move back bar air-operated solenoid valve 25, injection rapid escape valve 214, injection plunger rod 212”; see lines 260 – 270), and
wherein at least two air valves (lines 326 – 339) configured to supply air to the air drive devices are provided at a same location (e.g., “open/matched moulds air-operated solenoid valve 15” lines 273 – 279; “injection/move back bar air-operated solenoid valve 25” lines 280 – 286; “Intake valve 30 inputs are by the powered compressor air of center air pumping plant 001 through preliminary treatment; The bottom righthand side of Vertical Rack 100 is provided with electrical control mechanism 2, and the end face of Vertical Rack 100 is provided with the pressure regulator valve 26 in the pneumatic injection branch road” lines 308 – 312), which is an air equipment mounting portion (see FIGs. 1 – 3, 5).
YAO does not disclose an air-driven platen drop preventing device configured to prevent a platen of the mold clamping device from dropping.
Like YAO, OMOBAYASHI, teaches a vertical injection molding machine, and discloses a movable platen fall prevention device 30 (analogous to the claimed “air-driven platen drop preventing device”), which includes a plate-like stopper 35 having a substantially square shape and a spring built-in air cylinder 40 that drives the stopper 35 (lines 255 – 268), and comprising an air supply device (not shown), which is connected to the air cylinder 40 by an air pipe 45 “so that air is supplied and discharged as described in the section of operation” (lines 269 – 353).
OMOBAYASHI discloses that “since the spring built-in type air cylinder 34 is employed, the movable platen fall prevention device 30 is automatically operated by the restoring force of the spring when the air is not supplied, such as at the time of a power failure. Since the operation of the movable platen fall prevention device 30 is released when the air is supplied and the air is supplied, a fail-safe effect can be obtained” (lines 354 – 370).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the injection molding machine of YAO with an air-driven platen drop preventing device (e.g., OMOBAYASHI’s movable platen fall prevention device 30 which can automatically be operated by the restoring force of the spring when the air is not supplied) configured to prevent a platen of the mold clamping device from dropping, as taught by OMOBAYASHI, for the purpose of, as suggested by the prior art, provide the injection molding machine with a fail-safe effect, even when air is not supplied. See MPEP 2143 (I) (G).
Regarding claim 2, YAO/OMOBAYASHI teaches the injection molding machine according to claim 1, wherein the injection molding machine is a vertical injection molding machine (e.g., YAO lines 89 – 94, FIGs. 2 – 5).
Regarding claim 3, YAO/OMOBAYASHI teaches the injection molding machine according to claim 1, further comprising: a master valve (e.g., UAO “ air intake valve 30”, FIGs. 1, 5, 7), the master valve being provided at the air equipment mounting portion (YAO FIGs. 1, 5, 7) such that air supplied from outside is supplied to the air valve via the master valve (see YAO FIG. 1, lines 253 – 257).
Regarding claim 4, YAO/OMOBAYASHI teaches the injection molding machine according to claim 1, wherein for the air drive device for which the air valve is provided at the air equipment mounting portion (see YAO FIGs. 1, 5, 7), a regulator (e.g., YAO “pressure regulator valve 26” lines 310 – 312), a residual pressure relief valve (“die sinking rapid escape valve 16”, “move back bar rapid escape valve 27”, “matched moulds rapid escape valve 112”, “injection rapid escape valve 214”, YAO lines 326 – 339) and a flow rate adjustment valve (e.g., YAO “steady air pressure function spare 32”, lines 253 – 257) are provided at the air equipment mounting portion (YAO FIGs. 1, 5, 7).
Regarding the claim limiting the structures to be arranged “at the air equipment mounting portion”, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have rearrange the mounting position for the air drive devices in the injection molding machine of YAO/OMOBAYASHI, with good expectation of success, and the modification would have not modified the operation of the injection molding machine, since it have been held that a mere rearrangement of element without modification of the operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.04 (VI) (C).
In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019,86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). “Shifting the location of an element would not have modified the operation of device.” In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ7 (CCPA 1975). “The particular placement of an element was held to be obvious.”
“It has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70”. In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400.
Regarding claim 5, YAO/OMOBAYASHI teaches the injection molding machine according to claim 2, wherein the vertical injection molding machine includes a controller (e.g., YAO “electrical control mechanism 2”, lines 239 – 245, lines 310 – 312), except for, wherein when a side to which the controller faces and from which a molded product is removed is a 180-degree side (e.g., see YAO “controller 2” FIGs. 2 – 3 and FIG. 7), and an opposite side is a 0-degree side, the air equipment mounting portion is provided on the 0-degree side (e.g., see YAO “controller 2” and “valve 30” in FIG. 7).
However, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have rearrange the mounting position for the controller and the air equipment mounting portion in the injection molding machine of YAO/OMOBAYASHI, with good expectation of success, and the modification would have not modified the operation of the injection molding machine, since it have been held that a mere rearrangement of element without modification of the operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.04 (VI) (C).
Claim(s) 6 – 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YAO, Guo-qing (CN-2931071-Y; “YAO”), in view of SHIMIZU FUSAO (JP H07164372 A; “SHIMIZU”), as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of MARUYAMA et al. (US 2022/0055268 A1; “MARUYAMA”).
Regarding claim 6 and claim 10, YAO/OMOBAYASHI teaches the injection molding machine according to claim 5 and claim 9, respectively, except for explicitly disclosing, wherein a housing, in which a temperature control panel is housed.
PNG
media_image1.png
560
629
media_image1.png
Greyscale
YAO, however, discloses a plate-shaped member is provided in a vertical direction, and the plate-shaped member serves as the air equipment mounting portion (see the annotated copy of YAO’s FIG. 7 below). An annotated copy of a portion of YAO’s FIGURE 7 is provided below:
In the above marked up figure, the markings were added by the examiner to facilitate discussion of YAO. In the above marked up copy, RPSM is a plate-shaped member provided in a vertical direction, and the plate-shaped member serves as the air equipment (e.g., valve 30, filter 3) mounting portion, and LPSM is a plate-shape member provided in a vertical direction, opposite to the RPSM, which serves as the controller 2 mounting portion.
Like YAO and OMOBAYASHI, MARUYAMA teaches an injection molding system (see FIGs. 1 – 2, Abstract, “the injection molding machine and a controller that controls the injection molding machine may be disposed side by side in a vertical direction” [0072]), comprising, inter alia, an injection control mechanism 120 including a barrel 112, injection cylinder 121, plunger 122, plunger driving section 123, nozzle 114 [0036 – 0037], a molding die temperature controller 235 [0018],
a housing 510, wherein a hot runner controller 530 and a heat medium temperature controller 540 are disposed in the housing 510 [0029], disclosing that the controllers can be rearranged to be housed above or below the housing 510 [0053],
[0021] “molding die temperature controller 235 is a temperature adjustment device for circulating a heat medium to a cooling pipe provided in the molding die 12 and keeping the temperature of the molding die 12 at constant temperature”,
[0031] “hot runner controller 530 is a device that performs temperature adjustment of a hot runner nozzle attached to the injection molding machine 220”,
[0032] “heat medium temperature controller 540 is a temperature adjusting device that cools a heat medium used by the molding die temperature controller 235”,
[0038] “the nozzle 114 is configured as a hot runner nozzle. A heater is disposed around the nozzle 114. The hot runner controller 530 controls the heater, whereby the temperature of the nozzle 114 is adjusted”,
[0073] “a temperature controller for adjusting temperature of a molding die included in the injection molding machine. According to such an aspect, it is possible to improve setting flexibility of the injection molding system”.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the injection molding machine of YAO/OMOBAYASHI with a temperature control panel (e.g., MARUYAMA hot runner controller 530 and heat medium temperature controller 540), and a housing, in which a temperature control panel is housed (e.g., MARUYAMA housing 510), for the purpose of, as suggested by the prior art, allowing for temperature adjustment of the injection molding machine, thereby improving setting flexibility of the injection molding system (MARUYAMA [0073]). See MPEP 2143 (I) (G).
Regarding claim 7 and claim 11, YAO/OMOBAYASHI/MARUYAMA teaches the injection molding machine according to claim 6 and claim 10, respectively, except for specifically disclosing, wherein the vertical injection molding machine includes a power supply-related housing, in which a servo amplifier and a power supply device are housed, disposed on the 0-degree side, and wherein the plate-shaped member is disposed at a position that does not interfere with opening and closing of the power supply-related housing.
YAO lines 156 – 161, however, discloses “power source”.
OMOBAYASHI lines 237 – 238, however, discloses “a brake built-in servo motor 20 [analogous to the claimed “servo amplifier”] is applied to the power source [analogous to the claimed “power supply device”] for driving the toggle type mold clamping device 10”, and lines 332 – 359, discloses “Electric power is supplied to the servo motor 20 with built-in brake. The brake 20 'of the servo motor 20 is released by energization. Also, compressed air is supplied to the air cylinder 40, and the spring is compressed.”
MARUYAMA [0053], however, discloses that the injection molding machine could comprising several “housings” (e.g., first housing 210, second housing 410, third housing 510).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the injection molding machine of YAO/OMOBAYASHI/MARUYAMA with a power supply-related housing, in which a servo amplifier and a power supply device (e.g., OMOBAYASHI servo motor and its related power supply device) are housed, for the purpose of e.g., protecting the servo amplifier and power supply device, and the modification would have yielded nothing more than predictable results and resulted in an improved system (e.g., not having the power supply device expose). See MPEP 2143 (I) (D).
Furthermore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to rearranged the power supply-related housing in the injection molding machine of YAO/OMOBAYASHI/MARUYAMA, wherein the plate-shaped member is disposed at a position that does not interfere with opening and closing of the power supply-related housing (e.g., MARUYAMA [0053] discloses that elements housed in the housings can be rearranged to be housed above or below the housings), with good expectation of success, and the modification would have not modified the operation of the injection molding machine, since it have been held that a mere rearrangement of element without modification of the operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.04 (VI) (C).
Regarding claim 8, YAO/OMOBAYASHI/MARUYAMA teaches the injection molding machine according to claim 5, except for, wherein the vertical injection molding machine is configured such that a housing that accommodates a temperature control panel is disposed on the 0-degree side, and wherein a back surface of the housing serves as the air equipment mounting portion.
However, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to rearranged housing that accommodates a temperature control panel in the injection molding machine of YAO/OMOBAYASHI/MARUYAMA, with good expectation of success, and the modification would have not modified the operation of the injection molding machine, since it have been held that a mere rearrangement of element without modification of the operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.04 (VI) (C).
Regarding clam 9, YAO/OMOBAYASHI/MARUYAMA teaches the injection molding machine according to claim 1, wherein the injection molding machine is a vertical injection molding machine (see YAO FIGs. 2 – 5, 7), and wherein the vertical injection molding machine includes a controller (YAO controller 2) that faces a first side from which a molded product is removed (see YAO FIGs. 2 – 3), and an opposite side is a second side, and the air equipment (e.g., valve 30 and filter 3, see YAO FIGs. 2 – 5, 7) mounting portion is provided on the second side.
Regarding claim 12, YAO/OMOBAYASHI/MARUYAMA teaches the injection molding machine according to claim 9, wherein the vertical injection molding machine includes a housing, in which a temperature control panel is housed (see the discussion of claim 6 above), except for, disposed on the second side, and wherein a back surface of the housing that faces a third side serves as the air equipment mounting portion, the third side being oriented between the first side and the second side.
However, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to rearranged housing that accommodates a temperature control panel, so that its back surface is oriented between a first side and a second side (note that MARUYAMA teaches the housing could be configured/arranged in different ways [0053], [0072], [0073]) in the injection molding machine of YAO/OMOBAYASHI/MARUYAMA, with good expectation of success, and the modification would have not modified the operation of the injection molding machine, since it have been held that a mere rearrangement of element without modification of the operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.04 (VI) (C).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
P. R. MORGAN (US Pat. No. 3,608,149 A): Injection moulding machine has an injection head including a downwardly directed nozzle supported on columns above a clamping table guided by the columns to be movable by a hydraulic piston and cylinder arrangement to clamp a mould assembly between the nozzle and table. (Abstract).
Watkins (US Pat. No. 5,153,007): Teaches a vertical injection molding press (see FIG. 1 and Col. 3 lines 6 – 9), comprising, inter alia, a controller box for controlling the heating element in response to the temperature signal provided by the temperature monitoring device, wherein the controller box is affixed to the rotatable platform (Col. 3 lines 6 – 30), and discloses a controller box 24 could include individual temperature control units for each of the mold blocks.
SHIMIZU FUSAO (JP H07164372 A; “SHIMIZU”): Teaches a fall prevention device 14 is an air cylinder 1, [0006]v “to reliably prevent the vertically movable portion from falling even when a pressure regulating valve having a high flow rate characteristic is used, and to provide a fall prevention device”, [0007]
“As described above, before the fall prevention device operates, since the control means actuates the falling. blocking means, the flow path blocking means seals the air in the air cylinder, so that the pressure falling. cylinder is kept high, and if the vertically movable portion is stopped, this stop If the state is maintained and the vertically movable portion is falling, the fall is suppressed, and in this state, the fall prevention device operates to prevent the vertically movable portion from falling.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDGAREDMANUEL TROCHE whose telephone number is (571)272-9766. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30.
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, Sam Zhao can be reached at 571-270-5343. 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.
/EDGAREDMANUEL TROCHE/Examiner, Art Unit 1744
/JEFFREY M WOLLSCHLAGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights