DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
The Applicant’s amendment filed on January 11, 2026 was received. Claim 1 was amended and claim 7 was cancelled.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S.C. code not included in this action can be found in the prior Office action issued October 31, 2018.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on January 11, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Engels (US 4,006,887) in view of Langsetmo et al. (US 4,810,099) and Phillips et al. (US 4,126,398) on claims 1, 3, 6-10, 21-26 and 28-30 are withdrawn because Applicant amended independent claim 1 to require that the two different liquids are both discharged out of the apertures of the mixing paddles.
Claims 1, 3, 6, 8-10, 21-26 and 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Engels in view of Langestmo et la., Phillips et al. and Engels (US 3,734,471, hereinafter referred to as ‘471).
Regarding claim 1: Engels discloses a mixing and coating apparatus which includes a horizontally oriented rotatable mixing shaft (7) provided within a cylindrical mixing container which is a housing inherently supported by a base, the housing having a trough (1) which is a horizontally-oriented coating chamber including a fiber feed zone (A), a glue feed zone (B) and a mixing zone (C), where the shaft (7) includes a plurality of mixing tools (14) and hollow agitators (17) which are paddles as well as a glue bath feed tube (16) connected to a source of glue liquid which feeds the glue mixture through the hollow shaft (7) and into a plurality of bores (217) that communicate with grooves (220) which are apertures defined in the hollow agitators (17) in order to disperse the glue onto the powder material fed through an inlet funnel (4) as well as direct movement of the fiber material centrifugally against the walls and longitudinally from the feed zone (A) to the mixing zone (C) and towards the outlet funnel (5), where the material movement along the walls can be described as being within a turbulent layer (col. 4 lines 8+, col. 5 lines 1-3, lines 61+, col. 6 lines 1-33, figures 1-3). Engels further discloses that the glue is continuously discharged through the bores (217) into the grooves (220) with no injected air. Engels discloses that the mixing container (1) has a flow of air present but this air does not interact with the glue until after it is discharged (col. 6 lines 1-33). Engels also teaches that a pressure blower (24) can be provided alternatively with a suction blower (25), and when the suction blower (25) is provided there is no air injected into the system, only air drawn out (col. 5 lines 50-59, figure 1). Engels further teaches that the glue liquid is introduced from one axial side of the shaft (7) and that a cooling water, which is another liquid, is introduced from the opposite axial side of the shaft (7) through a pipe coupling (19) (col. 4 lines 8-37, figure 1).
Engels fails to explicitly disclose the composition of the walls of the trough or a deforming system comprising one or more deforming members connected to a drive system configured to deform and flex the flexible walls of the trough. However, Langsetmo et al. discloses a similar mixing device which includes a housing (300) having a flexible silicone sleeve (302) which defines the mixing chamber (303), along with deforming means consisting of a circular or arcuate cage (340) having a number of brackets (346, 348) each of which support a shaft (350) having a cylindrical deforming member (352) connected to a drive means designed to circularly reciprocate the deforming members (352) around the flexible sleeve (302) between the cage (340) and sleeve (302) such that the walls of the sleeve (302) are deformed in order to remove any material adhered thereto (col. 5, lines 32-41, col. 8 lines 63+, col. 9 lines 1-65, figure 6). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use flexible chamber walls and a deforming means as taught by Langsetmo et al. for the device of Engels because Langsetmo et al. teaches that this prevents the accumulation of materials on the inner surface of the mixing chamber (col. 5 lines 32-41).
Engels discloses that the agitators (17) have a conically tapering section (203’) which is an angled section such that they are angled relative to the longitudinal axis of the shaft (7) (see figures 1-2). Engels fails to explicitly disclose that the agitators (17) are angled with at least four different rows of the agitators (17) being at different angles from each other relative to the plane normal to the axis of the shaft (7).
However, Phillips et al. discloses a similar mixer apparatus having a plurality of rows of mixing paddles (83), more than four such rows, around a rotor (57) where the mixing paddles (83) are shown to have at least three different angles in subsequent rows towards the downstream end of the mixer (figure 1, appended below), and where Phillips et al. further teaches that each of the paddles are pitched at a precise angle dependent on a number of factors including residence time of the mixture in each area, but ultimately are drawn to mix and advance the material through the housing, and the angles are individually adjustable in order to be tuned to any number of the variables dealing with the angles (col. 4 lines 47+, figure 1). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to angle the paddles of at least four rows in the way taught by Phillips et al. for the apparatus of Engels because Phillips et al. shows a plurality of rows having larger angulation in the material moving direction and teaches that the exact angle of each paddle in each row is a result effective variable for the purposes of mixing and moving the material correctly (col. 4 lines 47+, figure 1), and optimization of art recognized result effective variables is not considered to be a patentable advance (Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill of art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ215.).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Discharge end)][AltContent: textbox (Largest angle)][AltContent: textbox (Larger angle)][AltContent: textbox (Smaller angle)][AltContent: textbox (Feed end)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
584
874
media_image1.png
Greyscale
While Engels discloses the supply of two liquids, one from each end, Engels fails to explicitly disclose that the two liquids are discharged from the bores of the agitators (17). However, ‘471 teaches a similar mixing and coating apparatus in which a plurality of tubes (47-50) is provided within the hollow mixing shaft (7) supplying a number of different liquids, including water, setting agent, glue and emulsion liquids which are supplied into the hollow mixing shaft (7) to then be dispensed by the liquid spraying tubes (17) to mix with and coat the solid wood chips (col. 6 lines 64+, col. 7 lines 1-14, figures 5-6). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a number of different liquids in different tubes as taught by ‘471 for the apparatus of Engels because ‘471 teaches that these liquids being dispersed at specific points helps reduce lumping of the glue material (col. 2 lines 49-58). When combining Engels and ‘471 the skilled artisan would have two choices of where to introduce the other liquids from- either the same end as the glue like in ‘471 or the opposite end like the water of Engels, and therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try introducing these liquids from the opposite end from the glue because trying from a finite number of solutions is not considered to be a patentable advance (MPEP 2143E).
Regarding claim 3: Engels and Langsetmo et al. disclose that the deforming means is designed to continuously rotate around the sleeve thus continuously deforming the sleeve (Langsetmo et al. col. 10 lines 7-13).
Regarding claim 6: Engels discloses that the glue liquid is introduced from one side of the shaft (7) and that a cooling water is introduced from the opposite side of the shaft (7) through a pipe coupling (19) (col. 4 lines 8-37, figure 1).
Regarding claim 8: Engels discloses that the inlet funnel (4) is mounted to the trough (1) and dispenses fibers which can be considered a particulate in powder form (col. 4 lines 41-54, figure 1).
Regarding claim 9: Engels shows that the agitators (17) are provided downstream of the inlet funnel (4) (see figure 1).
Regarding claim 10: Engels discloses that the rotation of the agitators (17) is designed to reduce accumulation and lumping of the materials throughout the mixing container (col. 1 lines 65+, col. 2 lines 1-32).
Regarding claim 21: Engels discloses that the glue is continuously discharged through the bores (217) into the grooves (220) with no injected air. Engels discloses that the mixing container (1) has a flow of air present but this air does not interact with the glue until after it is discharged (col. 6 lines 1-33).
Regardless, this is a functional limitation, and as such, when read in light of the instant specification this claim appears to require that the liquid is not connected to any atomizer when expelled from the paddles such that there is no air mixed with the liquid during an atomization step. Therefore, since Engels teaches that the glue is fed directly out of the grooves (220) with no atomization, it also reads on this claim (col. 6 lines 1-20).
Regarding claim 22: Engels and Langsetmo et al. disclose that the deforming members (352) are cylindrical and therefore spindle-shaped (Langsetmo et al. col. 9 lines 20-39, figure 6).
Regarding claim 23: Engels and Langsetmo et al. disclose that deforming members (352) are provided rotatably on a circular cage or ring (34) which is an arcuate support member extending around the sleeve (302) (Langsetmo et al. col. 9 lines 20-39, figure 6).
Regarding claim 24: Engels and Langsetmo et al. fail to explicitly disclose that the driving speed of the deforming members is adjustable. However, Langsetmo et al. does teach that any variety of other types of drive means can be used (col. 10 lines 7-13) and further discloses that one of the goals of the invention is to ensure adjustability to any desired process (col. 1 lines 62+, col. 2 lines 1-7). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a drive means capable of adjusting the speed because Langsetmo et al. teaches that adjustability is desired and other drive means can be used (col. 1 lines 62+, col. 2 lines 1-7, col. 10 lines 7-13) and because making elements adjustable is not considered to be a patentable advance (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding claim 25: Engels and Langsetmo et al. disclose that deforming members (352) are driven rotatably around the sleeve (302) (Langsetmo et al. col. 10 lines 7-13).
Regarding claim 26: Engels and Langsetmo et al. disclose that the flexible sleeve can be made of silicone (Langsetmo et al. col. 8 lines 31-43).
Regarding claim 28: Engels discloses that the glue exits from the bores (217) to the grooves (220) as a film only, such that it is not atomized or broken up into droplets (col. 6 lines 1-33).
Regarding claim 29: Engels discloses that reducing and controlling residence time was an important factor for prior art devices (col. 1 lines 42-54), but fails to explicitly disclose that the paddles are configured to convey the particulate through the chamber with a residence time within a range of 2 to 60 seconds. However, Phillips et al. discloses that typical residence times of the material are about 1-5 seconds, and further teaches that the exact angulation of the paddles (83) directly affects this residence time (col. 5 lines 3-43, col. 4 lines 52-57). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to control the residence time of Engels to achieve the time of about 1 to 5 seconds by angling the paddles properly as taught by Phillips et al. because Phillips et al. discloses that long residence times can cause difficulties due to material curing (col. 1 lines 7-33).
Regarding claim 30: Engels, Langsetmo et al. and Phillips et al. teach that the paddles can be angled relative to the plane normal to the longitudinal axis of the shaft at an increasing degree of angulation moving from the feed end to the discharge end (see Phillips et al. figure 1, annotated above).
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Engels, Langsetmo et al., Phillips et al. and ‘471 as applied to claims 1, 3, 6, 8-10, 21-26 and 28-30 above and further in view of Nogi et al. (US 2004/0240316).
Regarding claim 27: Engels, Langsetmo et al. and Phillips et al. fail to explicitly disclose that the shaft or agitators are coated with a polymeric material designed to reduce adhesion thereto. However, Nogi et al. discloses a similar mixing device in which the internal surface and paddles or vanes are coated with a non-stick Teflon coating, which is a polymeric material (par. 8). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to coat the shaft (7) and agitators (17) of Engels with Teflon similarly to the way described in Nogi et al. because applying a known element or technique to improve similar devices yielding predictable results is not considered to be a patentable advance (MPEP 2143C,D).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 11, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant primarily argues that none of the cited art disclose supplying multiple liquids through the same mixing paddles as now required by claim 1.
In response:
Applicant’s arguments are moot because they do not apply to the previously cited ‘471 which has been added to the above 103 rejections because it does teach the claimed multi-liquid feed arrangement.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN A KITT whose telephone number is (571)270-7681. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
/S.A.K/
Stephen Kitt Examiner, Art Unit 1717
2/26/2026
/YEWEBDAR T TADESSE/