DETAILED ACTION
In Application filed on 01/25/2026, claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 8, 12, and 14 are currently amended. Claims 21-40 are canceled. Claims 1-20 are considered in the current Office 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 Interpretation
The Examiner wishes to point out the application claims are directed towards an apparatus and as such will be examined under such conditions. The material worked upon or the process of using the apparatus is viewed as recitation of intended use and is given patentable weight only to the extent that structure is added to the claimed apparatus (Please see MPEP 2112.01 and 2114-2115 for further details).
Claims 7, 9, 13, 15, and 20 recites the limitation “precious metals” has been interpreted by the Examiner as “the term “precious metals” refers to gold, silver, ruthenium, rhodium, palladium, osmium, iridium, and platinum” which corresponds to [0115] of the instant application.
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.
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) 1-7, 9-12, 14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable overUS2008/0138510 (Wu) and US6,773,247 (“Osada et al” hereinafter Osada).
Regarding Claim 1, Wu teaches a mold (Figure 7, optical disk mold 40) comprising a substrate (Figure 7, second mold plate 42) with a mold cavity (Figure 7, mold cavity 48) that can receive a material and impart a shape to the material during molding of the received material ([0030]), wherein the mold cavity comprises a coated surface (Figure 7, the surface of the second mold plate 42, which formed the mold cavity is coated [0028]), wherein the coated surface comprises a surface coating comprising an alloy layer (Figure 7 and [0028], smooth coating layer 466 can be made from a fine material, such as tungsten carbide or aluminum silicide).
Wu fails to teach the alloy layer comprising (i) molybdenum or tungsten and (ii) at least one element selected from the group consisting of nickel, cobalt, chromium, tin, phosphorous, iron, magnesium and boron or at least one compound comprising one or more of nickel, cobalt, chromium, tin, phosphorous, iron, magnesium or boron.
However, in the same field of molding with surface coating on the mold substrate surface, Osada teaches the alloy layer (Figure 2, coating layer A on the surface of the bottom die 2 and col. 2, lies 41-46, a coating layer of nickel-tungsten alloy) comprising (i) molybdenum or tungsten (col. 2, lies 41-46, a coating layer of nickel-tungsten alloy) and (ii) at least one element selected from the group consisting of nickel (col. 2, lies 41-46, a coating layer of nickel-tungsten alloy), cobalt, chromium, tin, phosphorous, iron, magnesium and boron or at least one compound comprising one or more of nickel, cobalt, chromium, tin, phosphorous, iron, magnesium or boron.
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 alloy layer taught by Wu such that it discloses all of the above mentioned limitations as taught by Osada to improve releasability of the molded body with respect to the mold to efficiently release the molded body (col. 2, lines 47-49).
Regarding Claim 2, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 1, wherein the alloy layer is present on all surfaces of the substrate (Osada, col. 3, lines 60-65, coating layer A is present on all surfaces).
Regarding Claim 3, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 1, wherein the alloy layer is present on inner surfaces of the substrate that contact the received material (Wu, Figures 7 and [0028], coating layer 466 is on the surface of the second mold plate 42 that is in contact with the received materials).
Regarding Claim 4, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 3, wherein the molybdenum or tungsten is present in the surface coating at 20% or less by weight based on a weight of the alloy layer (Osada, col. 3, lines 5-15, coating layer A having a tungsten content of 20% by weight).
Regarding Claim 5, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 3. Osada fails to explicitly teach wherein the surface coating comprises a surface roughness Ra of less than 1 micron.
However, Osada teaches the surface coating comprises of nickel-tungsten alloy where the coating layer A having a tungsten content of 20% by weight (col. 3, lines 5-15) which is identical to the surface coating of the claimed instant application.
With respect to the surface roughness Ra required by the claims, it is the position of the examiner that because the reference teaches the use of the same materials for surface coating as required by the instant claims, the roughness of the surface coating would be expected to be the same. The prima facie case can be rebutted by evidence showing that the prior art products do not necessarily possess the characteristics of the claimed products. In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01 (II).
Regarding Claim 6, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 3, wherein the alloy layer consists essentially of nickel and tungsten (Osada, col. 2, lies 41-46, a coating layer of nickel-tungsten alloy),
Regarding Claim 7, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 6, wherein the surface coating comprises the molybdenum or tungsten is present in the alloy layer at 20% or less by weight based on a weight of the surface coating (Osada, col. 3, lines 5-15, coating layer A having a tungsten content of 20% by weight), and the surface coating excludes precious metals (page 2, col. 2, lies 41-46, a coating layer of nickel-tungsten alloy which excludes precious metals). Osada fails to explicitly teach a surface roughness Ra of less than 1 micron.
However, Osada teaches the surface coating comprises of nickel-tungsten alloy where the coating layer A having a tungsten content of 20% by weight (col. 3, lines 5-15) which is identical to the surface coating of the claimed instant application.
With respect to the surface roughness Ra required by the claims, it is the position of the examiner that because the reference teaches the use of the same materials for surface coating as required by the instant claims, the roughness of the surface coating would be expected to be the same. The prima facie case can be rebutted by evidence showing that the prior art products do not necessarily possess the characteristics of the claimed products. In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01 (II).
Regarding Claim 9, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 3, wherein the surface coating is free of any precious metals (Osada, col. 2, lies 41-46, a coating layer of nickel-tungsten alloy which excludes precious metals).
Regarding Claim 10, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 1, wherein the alloy layer is an exposed outer layer of the surface coating (Wu, Figure 7, coating layer 466 is the exposed outer layer of the coating toward the mold cavity 48).
Regarding Claim 11, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 10, wherein the exposed outer layer (i) consists essentially of molybdenum or tungsten and only one element or compound comprising nickel (Osada, Figure 2, coating layer A on the surface of the bottom die 2 and col. 2, lies 41-46, a coating layer of nickel-tungsten alloy).
Regarding Claim 12, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 1, further comprising an intermediate layer (Wu, Figure 7, connecting coating layer 462) between the alloy layer and the surface of the substrate (Figure 7, connecting coating layer 462 is between the coating layer 466 and the surface of the second mold plate 42).
Regarding Claim 14, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 1, further comprising an additional layer formed on the alloy layer (Wu, Figure 7, connecting coating layer 462).
Regarding Claim 16, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 1, wherein the substrate comprises a textured surface (Wu, Figure 7, coating layer 466 is the exposed outer layer of the coating toward the mold cavity 48).
Regarding Claim 17, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 1, wherein the coated surface comprises a textured surface (Wu, Figure 7 and [0030], stamper 43 which has microstructure pattern).
Regarding Claim 18, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 17. Wu teaches the second mold plate 42 undergoes some surface treatments, such as a polishing process, to adjust the shape and the thickness thereof, and subsequently undergoes a surface-roughing treatment and cleaning to turn a surface region of the second mold plate 42 adjacent to the mold cavity 48 into a cleaned rough surface 422 (Figure 4 and [0024]), but fails to explicitly teach wherein the textured surface comprises a surface roughness Ra of more than 1 micron and less than 30 microns.
As degrees of polishing is a variable that can be modified, among others, by adjusting said surface roughness of the textured surface, with said increasing polishing as surface roughness decreased, the precise surface roughness would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed surface roughness cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the thickness of the coating in the apparatus of Smith to obtain the desired degrees of surface polishing (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Regarding Claim 19, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 17. Wu teaches the second mold plate 42 undergoes some surface treatments, such as a polishing process, to adjust the shape and the thickness thereof, and subsequently undergoes a surface-roughing treatment and cleaning to turn a surface region of the second mold plate 42 adjacent to the mold cavity 48 into a cleaned rough surface 422 (Figure 4 and [0024]), but fails to explicitly teach wherein the textured surface comprises a surface roughness Ra of more than 0.5 microns and less than 15 microns.
As degrees of polishing is a variable that can be modified, among others, by adjusting said surface roughness of the textured surface, with said increasing polishing as surface roughness decreased, the precise surface roughness would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed surface roughness cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the thickness of the coating in the apparatus of Smith to obtain the desired degrees of surface polishing (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Regarding Claim 20, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 17, wherein the coated surface is free of precious metals (Osada, col. 2, lies 41-46, a coating layer of nickel-tungsten alloy which excludes precious metals).
Claim(s) 8, 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US2008/0138510 (Wu) and US6,773,247 (“Osada et al” hereinafter Osada) as applied to claims 1 or 12 above, and further in view of US2011/0008646 (“Cahalen et al” hereinafter Cahalen).
Regarding Claim 8, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 1 but fails to teach wherein the alloy layer is an electrodeposited alloy layer.
However, in the same field of using surface coating with alloy layer, Cahalen teaches electrodeposition is a common technique for depositing such coatings ([0002]) and the alloy layer is an electrodeposited alloy layer ([0016] and [0033], the first layer comprises a nickel-tungsten alloy and the coating may be applied using an electrodeposition process).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the mold as taught by the modified Wu such that it teaches all of the above limitations as taught by Cahalen to exhibit desirable properties and characteristics such as durability, corrosion resistance, and high conductivity ([0016]).
Regarding Claim 13, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 12, Wu teaches wherein the alloy layer is present as an exposed outer layer of the surface coating (Wu, Figure 7, coating layer 466 is the exposed outer layer of the coating toward the mold cavity 48). The modified Wu fails to teach wherein the exposed outer layer is an electrodeposited alloy layer, and wherein the electrodeposited alloy layer excludes precious metals.
However, in the same field of using surface coating with alloy layer, Cahalen teaches electrodeposition is a common technique for depositing such coatings ([0002]) and the alloy layer is an electrodeposited alloy layer ([0016] and [0033], the first layer comprises a nickel-tungsten alloy and the coating may be applied using an electrodeposition process), and wherein the electrodeposited alloy layer excludes precious metals ([0016], the first layer comprises a nickel-tungsten alloy which excludes precious metals).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the mold as taught by the modified Wu such that it teaches all of the above limitations as taught by Cahalen to exhibit desirable properties and characteristics such as durability, corrosion resistance, and high conductivity ([0016]).
Regarding Claim 15, the modified Wu teaches the mold of claim 1 but fails to teach wherein the alloy layer is present as an electrodeposited alloy layer, and wherein the electrodeposited alloy layer excludes precious metals.
However, in the same field of using surface coating with alloy layer, Cahalen teaches electrodeposition is a common technique for depositing such coatings ([0002]) and the alloy layer is present as an electrodeposited alloy layer ([0016] and [0033], the first layer comprises a nickel-tungsten alloy and the coating may be applied using an electrodeposition process), and wherein the electrodeposited alloy layer excludes precious metals ([0016], the first layer comprises a nickel-tungsten alloy which excludes precious metals).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the mold as taught by the modified Wu such that it teaches all of the above limitations as taught by Cahalen to exhibit desirable properties and characteristics such as durability, corrosion resistance, and high conductivity ([0016]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XINWEN (Cindy) YE whose telephone number is (571)272-3010. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:30 - 17:00.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1487. 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.
XINWEN (CINDY) YE
Examiner
Art Unit 1754
/LARRY W THROWER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights