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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/11/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 6-9, and 11-21 are pending. Claims 11-20 remain withdrawn.
In view of the amendment, filed 02/11/2026, claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 are updated from the previous Office Action mailed 08/11/2025.
Claim Interpretation
The examiner notes that the examined claims are directed to an apparatus, and materials or articles worked upon by an apparatus in its intended use (in this case, a nicotine gum) do not limit the apparatus claims. See MPEP 2115.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 7-9, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shulski et al., US 20060040041 A1, in view of McCartney, US 5073323 A, and Modak, US 20170071226 A1 (references of record).
Regarding claim 1, Shulski discloses an apparatus for forming a nicotine gum (apparatus for forming gum, Fig. 1, [0033], [0061], note that the gum being a nicotine gum does not further limit the structure of the claimed apparatus), the apparatus comprising:
A first pair of drums (series of rollers of sheet-forming mechanism, [0041]) configured to receive and press a nicotine gum mixture to a first thickness so as to form a first pressed sheet (that step the sheet down to a desired and continuous thickness, [0041]);
A second pair of drums (product-forming rollers, [0046]; rollers 82 and 84 of product forming machine 80, Figs. 7-9, [0066]-[0068]) configured to receive and score the first pressed sheet (product-forming rollers receive and score sheet, [0057], [0067]-[0068]) so as to form a scored sheet including a plurality of gum pieces (scored sheet including plurality of gum pieces, [0057], [0068], Figs. 4A-4B), the second pair of drums including
A first drum (upper roller 82, Fig. 7) including a first die (patterned product-forming surface of upper roller 82, Fig. 7), the first die defining a first plurality of recessed portions (series of pockets 100, Fig. 7, [0068]), the first die including a first pattern (pattern defined by series of pockets 100, Fig. 7), the first drum connected to an upper gear assembly (see gear 96, Fig. 7, [0066]), the upper gear assembly configured to rotate the first drum at a first speed ([0066]), and
A second drum (lower roller 84, Fig. 7) including a second die (patterned product-forming surface of lower roller 84, Fig. 7), the second die defining a second plurality of recessed portions corresponding to the first plurality of recessed portions (series of pockets 102, Fig. 7, [0068]), the second die including a second pattern (pattern defined by series of pockets 102, Fig. 7), the second pattern being a mirror image of the first pattern (Fig. 7, [0068]; see also formed products in Figs. 4A-4B), and the second pair of drums spaced (gap W, Fig. 7, [0069]) and configured to align a first plurality of non-recessed portions on the first die with a second plurality of non-recessed portions on the second die (configured to align respective shapes of mating pockets, [0068]; see also formed products in Figs. 4A-4B) so as to at least score the first pressed sheet into the plurality of gum pieces ([0068], to form product shown in Figs. 4A-4B), the second drum connected to a lower gear assembly (see gear 98, Fig. 7, [0066]), the lower gear assembly configured to rotate the second drum at a second speed ([0066]), the first speed and the second speed established to facilitate consistent material transfer (the speed of the rollers being controlled to match or align with the feed rate of the scored sheet, [0067], i.e., to facilitate consistent transfer), such that the first plurality of non-recessed portions on the first die is aligned with the second plurality of non-recessed portions on the second die (pocket shapes of each roller are aligned, [0068]), wherein
A number of teeth on each gear, a size of each gear, and a number of gears in each of the upper gear assembly and the lower gear assembly (gears 96, 98 have a number of teeth, a size, and a number, Fig. 7) determine a speed relationship between the first speed of the first drum and the second speed of the second drum (and the gears determine speed and direction of the rollers 82, 84, [0066]), and
The first speed and the second speed are determined based on a speed of removal of the plurality of gum pieces from the apparatus (the speed of the rollers being set to produce a desired output per minute, [0039]).
Shulski does not disclose the second speed of the second drum is different than the first speed of the first drum to allow for imposed strain in the first pressed sheet to relax as the first pressed sheet proceeds through the apparatus.
Note that the language of “to allow for imposed strain in the first pressed sheet to relax as the first pressed sheet proceeds through the apparatus” does not limit the claim to a particular structure but merely states a result of the limitations already recited in the claim. Furthermore, Shulski discloses the roller configuration being arranged to achieve a net zero force on the product sheet in a direction transverse to the travel direction of the sheet ([0011], [0082]-[0083]).
In the analogous art, McCartney discloses a shaped article forming apparatus (Fig. 1) including a pair of rollers having mating, mirror-image die surfaces which align to form the product (rollers 11 and 13 having respective mating surfaces 23 and 25, Fig. 4, col. 12, line 63-col. 13, line 1) and which are driven to rotate by respective gear assemblies (Fig. 2, col. 11, lines 16-42). McCartney teaches that co-acting rollers may have different dimensions, and at least when mating surfaces have different outer diameters the rollers should be rotated at correspondingly different speeds in order to ensure the mating surfaces of corresponding die pockets remain aligned (col. 12, line 63-col. 13, line 11).
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 Shulski such that the lower gear assembly was configured to rotate the second drum at a second speed which was different than the first speed in order to provide the ability to accommodate differently sized rollers and, in the case that the roller diameters were not the same, to ensure the mating die pockets of the rollers remained relatively aligned and coordinated with the feed speed, as generally desired by Shulski and taught by McCartney. The proposed modification would not have precluded the possibility of imposed strain relaxation as the first pressed sheet proceeds through the apparatus, and thus further meets the intended result of allowing for imposed strain in the first pressed sheet to relax as the first pressed sheet proceeds through the apparatus.
The combination is silent as to a heater configured to heat the first drum of the second pair of drums, the second drum of the second pair of drums, or a combination thereof, so as to heat the first pressed sheet.
In the analogous art, Modak discloses a gum-forming apparatus (Abstract, Fig. 1) including a pair 18 of forming rollers 26 and 28 (Fig. 1) which may be used for scoring or cutting gum into scored sheets ([0050]). Modak teaches the rollers of the system being heated in order to improve compressibility and/or formability of the gum sheet depending on a desired effect on the final gum product ([0015], [0037]-[0039]).
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 second pair of drums of Shulski to include a heater configured to heat the first drum, the second drum, or a combination thereof, so as to heat the first pressed sheet in order to provide the capability of controlling the temperature of the gum sheet to improve compressibility and/or formability of the gum sheet depending on a desired effect on the final gum product, as taught by Modak.
Regarding claim 7, modified Shulski discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Shulski further discloses a first segment of a non-recessed portion of the first die defines one side of each of a pair of adjacent recessed portions (Fig. 9, the pocket 100 outlines being non-recessed and positioned between adjacent recessed portions internal to the outlines - so as to produce the shapes depicted in Figs. 4A-4B; see also Fig. 12B showing non-recessed portions between adjacent recessed portions 200 of upper roller 182, noting that the illustrated pocket shape is different in the depicted embodiment).
Regarding claim 8, modified Shulski discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Shulski further discloses the second pair of drums is downstream of the first pair of drums (product-forming drums at 26 are downstream of sheet-forming drums at 20, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 9, modified Shulski discloses the limitations of claim 8, and Shulski further discloses a third pair of drums (preforming roll set at 24, Fig. 1, rollers 62 and 64, Fig. 5) between the second pair of drums and the first pair of drums (Fig. 1), the third pair of drums being configured to receive and press the first pressed sheet to a second uniform thickness ([0065]).
Regarding claim 21 and the second pair of drums being configured to “cut” the first pressed sheet as opposed to “score” the first pressed sheet, the examiner notes that the scope of each action as presently claimed and as it relates to the apparatus is essentially the same. Each function involves cutting the sheet of material, where a “score” is simply a relatively shallow cut performed by the same structure. The particular structure used to perform the cutting (patterned drums) is the same as the structure used to perform the scoring (patterned drums), and whether these elements are used to cause cutting or scoring does not change the particular structure of the device.
Regarding claim 21, Shulski discloses an apparatus for forming a nicotine gum (apparatus for forming gum, Fig. 1, [0033], [0061], note that the gum being a nicotine gum does not further limit the structure of the claimed apparatus), the apparatus comprising:
A first pair of drums (series of rollers of sheet-forming mechanism, [0041]) configured to receive and press a nicotine gum mixture to a first thickness so as to form a first pressed sheet (that step the sheet down to a desired and continuous thickness, [0041]);
A second pair of drums (product-forming rollers, [0046]; rollers 82 and 84 of product forming machine 80, Figs. 7-9, [0066]-[0068]) configured to receive and cut the first pressed sheet (product-forming rollers cut sheet, [0046], [0050], [0057], [0068]) so as to form a plurality of gum pieces (to form plurality of separate products 50, [0046], [0050], [0057]), the second pair of drums including
A first drum (upper roller 82, Fig. 7) including a first die (patterned product-forming surface of upper roller 82, Fig. 7), the first die defining a first plurality of recessed portions (series of pockets 100, Fig. 7, [0068]), the first die including a first pattern (pattern defined by series of pockets 100, Fig. 7), the first drum connected to an upper gear assembly (see gear 96, Fig. 7, [0066]), the upper gear assembly configured to rotate the first drum at a first speed ([0066]), and
A second drum (lower roller 84, Fig. 7) including a second die (patterned product-forming surface of lower roller 84, Fig. 7), the second die defining a second plurality of recessed portions corresponding to the first plurality of recessed portions (series of pockets 102, Fig. 7, [0068]), the second die including a second pattern (pattern defined by series of pockets 102, Fig. 7), the second pattern being a mirror image of the first pattern (Fig. 7, [0068]; see also formed products in Figs. 4A-4B), and the second pair of drums spaced (gap W, Fig. 7, [0069]) and configured to align a first plurality of non-recessed portions on the first die with a second plurality of non-recessed portions on the second die (configured to align respective shapes of mating pockets, [0068]; see also formed products in Figs. 4A-4B) so as to cut the first pressed sheet into the plurality of gum pieces (to cut [0050], [0068]), the second drum connected to a lower gear assembly (see gear 98, Fig. 7, [0066]), the lower gear assembly configured to rotate the second drum at a second speed ([0066]), the first speed and the second speed established to facilitate consistent material transfer (the speed of the rollers being controlled to match or align with the feed rate of the scored sheet, [0067], i.e., to facilitate consistent transfer),
Wherein the first speed and the second speed are determined based on a speed of removal of the plurality of gum pieces from the apparatus (the speed of the rollers being set to produce a desired output per minute, [0039]), and
A number of teeth on each gear, a size of each gear, and a number of gears in each of the upper gear assembly and the lower gear assembly (gears 96, 98 have a number of teeth, a size, and a number, Fig. 7) determine a speed relationship between the first speed of the first drum and the second speed of the second drum (and the gears determine speed and direction of the rollers 82, 84, [0066]).
Shulski does not disclose the second speed of the second drum is different than the first speed of the first drum to allow for imposed strain in the first pressed sheet to relax as the first pressed sheet proceeds through the apparatus.
Note that the language of “to allow for imposed strain in the first pressed sheet to relax as the first pressed sheet proceeds through the apparatus” does not limit the claim to a particular structure but merely states a result of the limitations already recited in the claim. Furthermore, Shulski discloses the roller configuration being arranged to achieve a net zero force on the product sheet in a direction transverse to the travel direction of the sheet ([0011], [0082]-[0083]).
In the analogous art, McCartney discloses a shaped article forming apparatus (Fig. 1) including a pair of rollers having mating, mirror-image die surfaces which align to form the product (rollers 11 and 13 having respective mating surfaces 23 and 25, Fig. 4, col. 12, line 63-col. 13, line 1) and which are driven to rotate by respective gear assemblies (Fig. 2, col. 11, lines 16-42). McCartney teaches that co-acting rollers may have different dimensions, and at least when mating surfaces have different outer diameters the rollers should be rotated at correspondingly different speeds in order to ensure the mating surfaces of corresponding die pockets remain aligned (col. 12, line 63-col. 13, line 11).
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 Shulski such that the lower gear assembly was configured to rotate the second drum at a second speed which was different than the first speed in order to provide the ability to accommodate differently sized rollers and, in the case that the roller diameters were not the same, to ensure the mating die pockets of the rollers remained relatively aligned and coordinated with the feed speed, as generally desired by Shulski and taught by McCartney. The proposed modification would not have precluded the possibility of imposed strain relaxation as the first pressed sheet proceeds through the apparatus, and thus further meets the intended result of allowing for imposed strain in the first pressed sheet to relax as the first pressed sheet proceeds through the apparatus.
The combination is silent as to a heater configured to heat the first drum of the second pair of drums, the second drum of the second pair of drums, or a combination thereof, so as to heat the first pressed sheet.
In the analogous art, Modak discloses a gum-forming apparatus (Abstract, Fig. 1) including a pair 18 of forming rollers 26 and 28 (Fig. 1) which may be used for scoring or cutting gum into scored sheets ([0050]). Modak teaches the rollers of the system being heated in order to improve compressibility and/or formability of the gum sheet depending on a desired effect on the final gum product ([0015], [0037]-[0039]).
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 second pair of drums of Shulski to include a heater configured to heat the first drum, the second drum, or a combination thereof, so as to heat the first pressed sheet in order to provide the capability of controlling the temperature of the gum sheet to improve compressibility and/or formability of the gum sheet depending on a desired effect on the final gum product, as taught by Modak.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shulski et al., US 20060040041 A1, in view of McCartney, US 5073323 A, and Modak, US 20170071226 A1, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ream et al., US 5733587 A (of record).
Regarding claim 6, modified Shulski discloses the limitations of claim 1. Shulski discloses that a diverse range of confectionary shapes can be made via the apparatus ([0013], [0034], [0056]), which can be readily modified to produce different confectionary shapes at different times ([0018]). However, Shulski is silent as to each of the plurality of recessed portions having a triangular cross-section along an upper surface of a non-recessed portion of the first die.
In the analogous art, Ream discloses an apparatus for forming chewing gum (Abstract), and Ream teaches analogous forming rollers 40, 42 (Figs. 2-4) being constructed so as to form triangles (col. 4, lines 44-50).
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 plurality of recessed portions of Shulski to have a triangular cross-section along an upper surface of a non-recessed portion of the first die in order to provide the ability to produce different confectionary shapes at different times, as suggested by Shulski, and since triangle-shaped gum was a known gum shape formed by such rolling configurations to produce confectionary products, as taught by Ream. Furthermore, a change in shape of a structure otherwise performing the same function has been found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the claimed configuration was significant. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/11/2026 and 11/12/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues (02/11/2026, pp. 10-11) that the cited references fail to disclose the newly added limitation directed to a number of teeth on each gear, a size of each gear, and a number of gears in each of the upper and lower gear assemblies determining a speed relationship between the first and second drums. Applicant argues that Shulski’s gears 96 and 98 are engaged with each other and enforce identical speeds at a fixed 1:1 ratio between rollers 82 and 84 and thus do not determine a speed relationship between two different speeds.
This argument is not found persuasive. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Shulski discloses a number of teeth on each gear, a size of each gear, and a number of gears in each of the upper and lower gear assemblies determine a speed relationship between the first and second drums, because they are configured to turn the rollers at a same speed and in opposite directions, as acknowledged by Applicant. Shulski therefore discloses the gear assemblies determine a speed relationship, the ordinary function of a driving gear arrangement, but does not disclose the speeds are different. The rejection additionally relies on McCartney, which discloses mating gear assemblies which are used to define a speed relationship where the corresponding rollers are rotated at different speeds, which McCartney discloses enables the use of differently sized rollers whose die surfaces continue to cooperate such that their mating surfaces remain aligned.
Applicant argues (02/11/2026, p. 12; 11/12/2025, p. 10) that McCartney does not disclose how the mating surface of compaction wheel 11 would be rotated by the respective gear 57 at twice the speed of mating surface 25 of compaction wheel 13 by gear 58, as the gears which would cause such rotation engage each other. Applicant argues that McCartney does not disclose a number of teeth on each gear, a size of each gear, and a number of gears determines a speed relationship between different speeds. Applicant argues that McCartney’s gears appear to mechanically constrain the drums to rotate at a fixed ratio dictated by the engagement of the gears.
The arguments are not found persuasive against the rejection. Examiner agrees that the gears do engage each other and asserts that this is how toothed gears defining a speed relationship are intended to function. It is unclear how the argument is intended to support that McCartney fails to disclose the argued limitation. McCartney discloses a mating, toothed gear arrangement defining a speed ratio between the drum speeds (Fig. 2, col. 11, lines 16-42) where the speeds can be set as relatively different speeds (col. 12, line 63 – col. 13, line 8). The speed ratio being a fixed ratio is not precluded by the claim language, so long as the respective speeds are different.
Applicant argues (11/12/2025, pp. 10-11) that one of ordinary skill in the art would not be motivated to modify Shulski in view of McCartney to arrive at the configuration to rotate the first and second drum at different speeds because Shulski discloses the drums turn at the same speed. Applicant seems to argue that there was no motivation to combine (p. 11) as well as that the combination would change the principle of operation of Shulski (p. 12).
These arguments are not found persuasive. The rejection sets forth a reason to combine in that McCartney teaches that rollers having a same diameter can be rotated at a same speed or rollers having a different diameter can be rotated at a correspondingly different speed to achieve the same effect. As such, the obviousness rejection is supported by the rationale to provide the capability of using differently sized rollers while maintaining the alignment of mating die pockets of the rollers (Final Rejection, p. 5). Applicant’s argument that a reconfiguration of the gears of Shulski to produce a different speed ratio would change the principle of operation of Shulski is not persuasive, because the purpose of the combination as taught by McCartney is specifically to retain the function of the cooperating, mating die rollers while enabling the use of relatively differently sized rollers. The principle of operation of the combination is the same as that of Shulski – to rotate the cooperating forming rollers at a speed that ensures mating die pockets of the rollers continue to align to form the intended product. McCartney teaches this function can be maintained in the presence of differently sized rollers by adjusting the rotation speed of rollers driven by respective gear assemblies.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 4249878 A, Komarek discloses a configuration to rotate patterned press rolls with cooperating cavities at different speeds to impose an optimum stress on the product, the different speeds being achieved by respective gear assemblies.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER L GROUX whose telephone number is (571)272-7938. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9am - 5pm ET.
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.
/J.L.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1754
/SUSAN D LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights