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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-14 in the reply filed on 07/29/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 23-30 are newly added.
.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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-9, 13, 24-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by WATANBE (US 7585101)
Regarding Claim 1 WATANBE discloses extruder barrel of an extrusion assembly, comprising: a first barrel portion defining a first cavity (Figure 7, first barrel-1C); a second barrel portion removably engaging with the first barrel portion and defining a second cavity (Figure 7, second barrel-1B); a bore at least partially defined by the first cavity of the first barrel portion and by the second cavity of the second barrel portion (Figure 7, a bore defined by the first cavity of the first barrel portion and by the second cavity of the second barrel portion ); wherein the first barrel portion and the second barrel portion are configurable between an assembled configuration and a disassembled configuration (Figures 6-7 ).
Regarding Claim 2 WATANBE discloses, wherein when the first barrel portion and the second barrel portion are in the disassembled configuration (Figures 6-7 showing assembled to disassembled configuration), line of sights of the first cavity of the first barrel portion and the second cavity of the second barrel portion are completely viewable along longitudinal axes of the first barrel portion and second barrel portion (Figure 7).
Regarding Claim 3 WATANBE discloses, further comprising: a set of connectors/screw releasably engaging the first barrel portion and the second barrel portion together at the assembled configuration (Figures 6-7).
Regarding Claim 5 WATANBE discloses: a set of passageways defined in the first barrel portion; and a set of threaded holes defined in the second barrel portion ; wherein a respective connector of the set of connectors passes through a respective passageway of the set of passageways and releasably engages with the second barrel portion inside a respective threaded hole of the set of threaded holes (Figure 17, claim 13, bolt-18).
Regarding Claim 6 WATANBE discloses : a set of alignment pins that aligns and engages the first barrel portion and the second barrel portion with one another (Col 2 line 45-50).
Regarding Claim 7 WATANBE discloses, further comprising: a set of first alignment cavities defined in the first barrel portion; and a set of second alignment cavities defined in the second barrel portion (Figure 2, Col 4 line 16-20 , recess portion-8 in each cavity); wherein a first end of each alignment pin of the set of alignment pins is received by the first barrel portion inside a respective alignment cavity of the set of first alignment cavities ; and wherein a second end of each alignment pin of the set of alignment pins is received by the second barrel portion inside a respective alignment cavity of the set of second alignment cavities (Figure 7, Col 4 line 42-43).
Regarding Claim 8 WATANBE discloses, further comprising: a pair of recesses defined between a first end of the first barrel portion and a second end of the first barrel portion (Col 2 line 25-29).
Regarding Claim 9 WATANBEE discloses, further comprising: a first pair of recesses defined between a first end of the first barrel portion and a second end of the first barrel portion (Col 2 line 57-67); and a second pair of recesses defined between a first end of the second barrel portion and a second end of the second barrel portion (Col 3 line 1-3).
Regarding Claim 13, WATANBE discloses a third barrel portion defining a third cavity (Figure 7 showing three barrel portions, 1A, 1B, 1C each has a cavity) ; the bore, collectively, is at least partially defined by the first barrel portion, the second barrel portion, and the third barrel portion (Figure 6 showing a common bore).
Regarding Claim 24 WATANBE discloses wherein the bore defines a uniform profile along the length of the first barrel portion and the second barrel portion such that a first diameter defined at first ends of the first barrel portion and the second barrel portion is the same as a second diameter defined at second ends of the first barrel portion and the second barrel portion (Figures 6-7).
Regarding Claim 25 WATANBE discloses the set of recesses is aligned with one of a set of passageways defined in the first barrel portion and a set of threaded holes defined in the second barrel portion (Col 2 line 55-56).
Regarding Claim 26 WATANBE discloses discloses, wherein the first set of recesses is aligned with a set of passageways defined in the first barrel portion; wherein the second set of recessed is aligned with a set of threaded holes defined in the second barrel portion (Col 2 line 45-50).
Regarding Claim 27 WATANBE discloses, wherein the second barrel portion is removably engageable with the first barrel portion along a longitudinal axis of the extruder barrel (Figure ).
Regarding Claim 28 WATANBE discloses wherein the second barrel portion is removably engageable with the first barrel portion along a vertical axis of the extruder barrel (Figure 4 retaining bolts-18)
Regarding Claim 29 WATANBE discloses wherein the second barrel portion is removably engageable with the first barrel portion along a longitudinal axis of the extruder barrel and a vertical axis of the extruder barrel (Figure5 through bolts-18).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WATANBE (US 7585101) in view of PADMANABHAN (US 20110063939) listed in IDS.
Regarding Claim 4 WATANBE discloses extruder barrel of an extrusion assembly, comprising: a first barrel portion and second barrel portion defining a first cavity and second cavity (Figures 6-7) but didn’t disclose that a first set of connectors releasably engaging the first barrel portion and the second barrel portion together at the assembled configuration between a first end of the extruder barrel and a medial point located between the first end of the extruder barrel and a second end of the extruder barrel. In the related field of endeavor PADMANABHAN discloses , further comprising: a first set of connectors releasably engaging the first barrel portion and the second barrel portion together at the assembled configuration between a first end of the extruder barrel and a medial point located between the first end of the extruder barrel and a second end of the extruder barrel (Figure 2A showing connectors/screws-208 configuration between a first end of the extruder barrel and a medial point located between the first end of the extruder barrel and a second end of the extruder barrel) ; and a second set of connectors releasably engaging the first barrel portion and the second barrel portion together at the assembled configuration between the second end of the extruder barrel and the medial point located between the first end of the extruder barrel and a second end of the extruder barrel (Figure 2A, showing connectors/screws-208 configuration between the second end of the extruder barrel and the medial point located between the first end of the extruder barrel and a second end of the extruder barrel); wherein the second set of connectors is greater than the first set of connectors (Figure annotated).
It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art to combine WATANBE with that of PADMANABHAN’s teaching of connectors at the first and second extruder barrel for the purpose of quick connect and disconnect coupling.
PNG
media_image1.png
718
924
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 10-12,14, 23, 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WATANBE (US 7585101) in view of Psiuk (US 5352539)
Regarding claim 10, WATANBE discloses, extruder barrel of an extrusion assembly, comprising: a first barrel portion defining a first cavity (Figures 6-7) but didn’t disclose that an internal coating applied to the first cavity of the first barrel portion and the second cavity of the second barrel portion. In the related field of endeavor pertaining to the art, Psuik discloses coating applied to the cavities of the extruder housing (Col 2 line 7-10).
It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art to combine WATANBE with that of Psuik teaching of coating the cavity walls for the purpose of minimizing the wear and increase the useful life of the extruder (Col 2 line 5-6).
Regarding Claim 11, Psuik discloses when the internal coating is applied to the first cavity of the first barrel portion and the second cavity of the second barrel portion, the extruder barrel is in the disassembled configuration (Col 2 line 16-18).
Regarding Claim 12, Psuik discloses that the internal coating is a corrosion or wear resistant coating (Col 2 line 16-18).
Regarding Claim 14 Watanbe discloses a third barrel portion defining a third cavity (Figure 7 showing three barrel portions, 1A, 1B, 1C each has a cavity); the bore, collectively, is at least partially defined by the first barrel portion, the second barrel portion, and the third barrel portion (Figure 6 showing a common bore). However, WATANBE didn’t disclose a fourth barrel portion removably engaging with the third barrel portion. Although, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.
WATANBE discloses the claimed invention except for the duplication of fourth barrel. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to duplicate the fourth barrel portion, since it have been held that a mere duplication of working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to duplicate an additional potion for the purpose of multiple barrel segments providing significant processing flexibility. SEE MPEP 2144.04VI
Regarding Claim 23, WATANBE discloses extruder barrel of an extrusion assembly, comprising: a first barrel portion defining a first cavity (Figure 7) , but didn’t disclose that bore defines a tapered profile along the length of the first barrel portion and the second barrel portion such that a first diameter defined at first ends of the first barrel portion and the second barrel portion is greater than a second diameter defined at second ends of the first barrel portion and the second barrel portion. In the related field of endeavor pertaining to the art, Psuik discloses a tapered profile along the length of the first barrel portion and the second barrel portion such that a first diameter defined at first ends of the first barrel portion and the second barrel portion is greater than a second diameter defined at second ends of the first barrel portion (Figure 5).
It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art to combine WATANBE with that of Psuik teaching of tapered barrel portion from one end to another end for the purpose of enhanced mechanical alignment during the assembling and disassembling process.
Regarding Claim 30 Psuik discloses extruder barrel of claim 10, wherein the internal coating is high nickel alloys (Col 2 line 13-15).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEBJANI ROY whose telephone number is (571)272-8019. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-5:30 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.
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.
/DEBJANI ROY/Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/ALISON L HINDENLANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Prosecution Insights