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)s submitted on 02/06/2025 and 01/27/2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, Applicant has been advised to replace “an injection device” in line 2 to – the injection device --; and
In claim 8, Applicant has been advised to replace “at least one second force measuring device” in line 2 to -- at least one force measuring device – and replace “an injection force” in line 2 to – the injection force --.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-13 are 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “an output for an injection piston” in lines 2, 4-6 and 8. It renders the claim indefinite because 1) it does not seem to be a structure of the apparatus, and 2) the specification does not clearly define what “the output” is. For the compact prosecution, Examiner has interpreted it as -- an injection piston --.
Claims 12 and 13 are indefinite because of the same reason above.
Claim 1 further recites the limitations “the drive force” in lines 6 and 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The remaining dependent claims 2-11 are also rejected under 112 (b) because they depend from, and thus include all the limitations of rejected claim 1.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “preferably” in line 2. The phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. Furthermore, a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 4 recites the broad recitation “the coupling device is formed by a spindle drive with a spindle and a spindle nut”, and the claim also recites “the spindle nut is arranged in a rotationally fixed manner and the spindle is rotatable by the electric motor” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
The remaining dependent claim 5 is also rejected under 112 (b) because it depends from, and thus includes all the limitations of rejected claim 4.
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.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen (WO2016/050002A1-of record _Machine Translation provided herewith).
With respect to claim 1, Chen teaches a drive device for an injection device (“the electro-hydraulic hybrid injection mechanism”, pg 6 li 8 and Fig. 1), comprising:
an injection piston (“the screw connector 4”, co 6 li 9) of an injection device to be acted upon in order to generate an injection force (“provide sufficient injection driving force”, pg 4 li 1),
at least one hydraulic drive mechanically connected to the injection piston (“two hydraulic cylinders 3”, pg 6 li 15; “the hydraulic power source through a hydraulic pipeline (not shown in the figure) and a hydraulic valve 8.”, pg 7 li 4-5),
at least one electric drive (“The electric drive assembly 2”, pg 7 li 9; “push plate 1”, pg 6 li 1; “piston rod”, pg 6 li 15), wherein the electric drive is mechanically connected to the injection piston via the hydraulic drive, so that the drive force generated by the electric drive can be transmitted together with the drive force generated by the hydraulic drive via the hydraulic drive to the injection piston for actuating the injection piston (“The rotation of the lead screw drives the lead screw nut to move the push plate forward, assisting the hydraulic system in injecting molten material.”, pg 8 li 13-15; “the movement of the push plate is jointly driven by a hydraulic cylinder and an electric drive mechanism”, pg 9 li 4-6),
wherein the at least one electric drive is at least partially integrated into the at least one hydraulic drive (“The piston rod of the hydraulic cylinder is driven and connected to the first end face of the push plate”, pg 6 li 15-pg 7 li 1), wherein the at least one electric drive has at least one electric motor (“motor 23”, pg 7 li 16) and a coupling device (“The ball screw assembly 21”, pg 7 li 13; “push plate 1”, pg 6 li 1; “piston rod”, pg 6 li 15), wherein at least the coupling device of the at least one electric drive (“piston rod”, pg 6 li 15) is arranged completely in a cylinder of the at least one hydraulic drive (“The piston rod of the hydraulic cylinder”, pg 6 li 15-pg 7 li 1).
With respect to claim 2, Chen as applied to claim 1 above teaches that the at least one hydraulic drive (“hydraulic cylinders 3”) has a piston-cylinder unit with a piston mounted in a cylinder (“The piston rod of the hydraulic cylinder”, pg 6 li 15-pg 7 li 1).
With respect to claim 3, Chen as applied to claim 2 above teaches that a rotary movement of the electric motor can be converted into a linear movement by the coupling device (“The electric drive assembly 2 converts the rotational motion of the motor into linear motion”, pg 7 li 9; “The ball screw assembly 21”, pg 7 li 13).
With respect to claim 4, Chen as applied to claim 1 above teaches that the coupling device is formed by a spindle drive (“The ball screw assembly 21”) with a spindle (“a screw 211”) and a spindle nut (“nut 212”) (pg 7 li 13-15).
With respect to claim 5, Chen as applied to claim 4 above teaches that the spindle drive is a ball screw drive (“The ball screw assembly 21”).
With respect to claim 6, Chen as applied to claim 2 above teaches that the at least one electric drive is at least partially integrated into the at least one hydraulic drive in such a way that the at least one electric drive is at least partially arranged in the cylinder of the at least one hydraulic drive (“The piston rod of the hydraulic cylinder is driven and connected to the first end face of the push plate”, pg 6 li 15-pg 7 li 1).
With respect to claim 7, Chen as applied to claim 1 above teaches that the at least one electric drive is at least partially integrated into the at least one hydraulic drive in such a way that at least the coupling device of the at least one electric drive is integrated into the at least one hydraulic drive (“The piston rod of the hydraulic cylinder is driven and connected to the first end face of the push plate”, pg 6 li 15-pg 7 li 1).
With respect to claim 8, Chen as applied to claim 2 above teaches that a distance measurement is carried out via an encoder of the at least one electric motor (“The encoder 7 can be connected to the motor 23”, pg 7 li 16).
With respect to claim 9, Chen as applied to claim 2 above teaches that the cylinder of the at least one hydraulic drive is designed as a single-acting cylinder (“The piston rod of the hydraulic cylinder is driven”, pg 6 li 15-pg 7 li 1 and Fig. 1).
With respect to claim 10, Chen as applied to claim 1 above teaches that a control or regulating device (“the central control system 6”) is provided by which the at least one hydraulic drive and/or the at least one electric motor can be controlled or regulated for applying a dynamic pressure and for carrying out a screw retraction (“The control system issues commands to control the opening and closing of the hydraulic valve, thereby making the hydraulic cylinder work”, pg 7 li 6-7; “the central control system simultaneously controls the hydraulic valves and motors to start.”, pg 8 li 9-10; “the electric drive mechanism precisely controls the displacement of the push plate, thereby precisely controlling the injection volume of molten material.”, pg 9 li 1-3).
With respect to claim 11, Chen as applied to claim 1 above teaches that a distance measurement is carried out via an encoder of the at least one electric motor (“The encoder 7 can be connected to the motor 23”, pg 7 li 16).
With respect to claims 12 and 13, Chen as applied to claim 1 above teaches that an injection device/an injection molding machine with at least one drive device according to claim 1 (pg 6 li 10).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUNJU KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1146. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00-4:00 EST M-Th; Flexing Fri.
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 Johnson can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/YUNJU KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights