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 Objections
Claims 1 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 2, --a-- should be added before “frame”.
Claim 1, line 3, “the shape” should be --a shape-- since it is the first time the limitation is recited.
Claim 6, line 3, “the movement” should be --a movement-- or just --movement-- since it is the first time the limitation is recited.
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.
Claims 5-6 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 5 recites “the movable wall” in line 1. However, claim 1 recites “at least one movable wall”. It is unclear if claim 5 is limiting the scope to a single movable wall or referring to a particular single movable wall. Examiner recommends amending claim 5 to recite --the at least one movable wall--.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the shaping operation" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner recommends --a shaping operation--.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Anttonen ‘375 (US 5,340,375).
Regarding claim 1, Anttonen '375 teaches:
a roller conveyor capable of conveying a glass sheet (roller conveyor 1a, Fig. 1; column 2, lines 19-21), a die (press plate 10, Figs. 1, 5), and a frame (ring mould 8 with abutments 20, 21, Fig. 5) having a rim capable of supporting the glass sheet thereon in a shape of a target product (top of ring mould 8 with glass sheet G supported thereon, Fig. 5)
the frame having a fixed wall (fixed positioning abutment 20, Fig. 5; column 2, lines 61-64) and at least one movable wall (positioning abutments 21 for the trailing edge and side edges, Fig. 5; column 2, lines 64-67).
Anttonen '375 does not specifically teach a coated glass sheet. However, the recited coated glass sheet constitutes material worked upon by the claimed apparatus. It has been held that the inclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. See MPEP 2115. It is considered that the Anttonen '375 teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim apparatus, and that the apparatus of Anttonen '375 is capable of functioning with a coated glass sheet.
Regarding claims 2-3, Anttonen '375 further teaches at least two movable walls, and at least three movable walls (positioning abutments 21 for the trailing edge and side edges, Fig. 5; column 2, lines 64-67 - wherein a trailing edge abutment and at least two side edge abutments would constitute at least two and at least three movable walls).
Regarding claim 5, Anttonen '375 further teaches the at least one movable wall is movable by an oscillating movement (column 2, lines 64-67; column 3, lines 8-18 - wherein repeating the actions of raising and lowering positioning abutments 21 for each piece of glass constitutes an oscillating movement).
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Honjo ‘908 (US 5,022,908).
Regarding claim 1, Honjo ‘908 teaches:
a roller conveyor capable of conveying a glass sheet (feed rollers 10; column 4, lines 6-10; column 4, lines 33-34), a die (mold 22, Fig. 2), and a frame (ring mold 14, Figs. 2-5) having a rim capable of supporting the glass sheet thereon in a shape of a target product (top of inner ring 19, with glass sheet pair G supported thereon, Figs. 2, 4)
the frame having a fixed wall (outer frame 17 or outer ring 18 or inner ring 19, Figs. 3-5; column 4, lines 31-37) and at least one movable wall (pushers 21, Figs. 3-4; column 4, lines 38-39; column 5, lines 45-47, 53-56).
Honjo ‘908 does not specifically teach a coated glass sheet. However, the recited coated glass sheet constitutes material worked upon by the claimed apparatus. It has been held that the inclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. See MPEP 2115. It is considered that the Honjo ‘908 teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim apparatus, and that the apparatus of Honjo ‘908 is capable of functioning with a coated glass sheet.
Regarding claims 2-3, Honjo ’908 further teaches at least two movable walls and at least three movable walls (pushers 21, Figs. 3-4).
Regarding claim 4, Honjo ‘908 further teaches the at least one movable wall is movable in a horizontal direction (Figs. 3-4 - wherein pushers 21 are driven by cylinder units 20, which one of ordinary skill in the art would understand to be linear actuators, thus causing linear horizontal motion of pushers 21).
Regarding claim 5, Honjo ‘908 further teaches the at least one movable wall is moveable by an oscillating movement (Figs. 3-4 - wherein pushers 21 are driven by cylinder units 20, which one of ordinary skill in the art would understand to be linear actuators, thus causing linear motion toward and away from cylinder units 20, which makes the pushers 21 capable of moving by an oscillating movement).
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fukami ‘290 (US 2010/0236290 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Fukami ‘290 teaches:
a roller conveyor capable of conveying a glass sheet (roller conveyor 14, Fig. 1; ¶ [0079]), a die (forming mold 302 or forming mold 602, Fig. 2; ¶ [0097], [0106]), and a frame (inner mold 230 or outer mold 240, Figs. 2-6) having a rim capable of supporting the glass sheet thereon in a shape of a target product (top of inner mold 230 or top of outer mold 240, Figs. 2-6)
the frame having a fixed wall (inner mold fixed frame 237 or outer mold fixed frame 242, Figs. 2-6) and at least one movable wall (inner mold movable frames 239 or outer mold movable frames 244, Figs. 2-6; ¶ [0087], [0092]).
Fukami ‘290 does not specifically teach a coated glass sheet. However, the recited coated glass sheet constitutes material worked upon by the claimed apparatus. It has been held that the inclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. See MPEP 2115. It is considered that the Fukami ‘290 teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim apparatus, and that the apparatus of Fukami ‘290 is capable of functioning with a coated glass sheet.
Regarding claims 2-3, Fukami ‘290 further teaches at least two movable walls and at least three movable walls (inner mold movable frames 239 or outer mold movable frames 244, Figs. 2-6; ¶ [0087], [0092] - wherein each portion 239 or 244 as seen in Fig. 4 may be considered a movable wall, thus defining two movable walls; alternatively, each straight portion between sharp corners of 239 or 244 as seen in Fig. 4 may be considered a movable wall, such that inner mold 230 has six movable walls, and outer mold 240 has 10 movable walls).
Regarding claim 4, Fukami ‘290 further teaches the at least one moveable wall is movable in a horizontal direction (¶ [0087], [0092] - wherein the flapping movements of frames 239 or 244 around hinge portions 238 or 243 include vectors of movement in both horizontal and vertical directions).
Regarding claim 5, Fukami ‘290 further teaches the at least one movable wall is movable by an oscillating motion (¶ [0087], [0092] - wherein the flapping movements of frames 239 or 244 around hinge portions 238 or 243, as frames 230 or 240 are raised and lowered, constitute oscillating motion).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anttonen ‘375 (US 5,340,375) in view of Frank ‘493 (US 4,666,493).
Regarding claim 6, Anttonen ‘375 is silent regarding a camera for monitoring a shaping operation, the camera being combined with a control system for controlling a movement of at least one of the movable walls. In analogous art of glass shaping apparatus, Frank ‘493 suggests a camera for monitoring a shaping operation, the camera being combined with a control system for controlling movement of a glass positioning structure for the benefit of ensuring the presence and accurate positioning of a glass sheet for shaping (camera 322, controller 324; column 4, lines 22-33; column 9, lines 10-16; column 10, line 57-column 11, line 39). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Anttonen ‘375 with a camera for monitoring a shaping operation, the camera being combined with a control system for controlling a movement of at least one of the movable walls, for the benefit of ensuring the presence and accurate positioning of a glass sheet for shaping, as suggested by Frank ‘493.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honjo ‘908 (US 5,022,908) in view of Frank ‘493 (US 4,666,493).
Regarding claim 6, Honjo ‘908 is silent regarding a camera for monitoring a shaping operation, the camera being combined with a control system for controlling a movement of at least one of the movable walls. In analogous art of glass shaping apparatus, Frank ‘493 suggests a camera for monitoring a shaping operation, the camera being combined with a control system for controlling movement of a glass positioning structure for the benefit of ensuring the presence and accurate positioning of a glass sheet for shaping (camera 322, controller 324; column 4, lines 22-33; column 9, lines 10-16; column 10, line 57-column 11, line 39). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Honjo ‘908 with a camera for monitoring a shaping operation, the camera being combined with a control system for controlling a movement of at least one of the movable walls, for the benefit of ensuring the presence and accurate positioning of a glass sheet for shaping, as suggested by Frank ‘493.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukami ‘290 (US 2010/0236290 A1) in view of Frank ‘493 (US 4,666,493).
Regarding claim 6, Honjo ‘908 is silent regarding a camera for monitoring a shaping operation, the camera being combined with a control system for controlling a movement of at least one of the movable walls. In analogous art of glass shaping apparatus, Frank ‘493 suggests a camera for monitoring a shaping operation, the camera being combined with a control system for controlling movement of a glass positioning structure for the benefit of ensuring the presence and accurate positioning of a glass sheet for shaping (camera 322, controller 324; column 4, lines 22-33; column 9, lines 10-16; column 10, line 57-column 11, line 39). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Honjo ‘908 with a camera for monitoring a shaping operation, the camera being combined with a control system for controlling a movement of at least one of the movable walls, for the benefit of ensuring the presence and accurate positioning of a glass sheet for shaping, as suggested by Frank ‘493.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. These references describe various movable elements for glass sheet shaping and/or positioning.
US 4,496,386
US 4,775,404
US 5,336,288
US 5,660,609
US 5,669,953
US 6,076,373
US 2018/0155232 A1
WO 2018/096339 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Erin Snelting whose telephone number is (571)272-7169. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8:00 to 5:00.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached at (571) 270-7001. 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.
/ERIN SNELTING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Prosecution Insights