DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Status of the Claims
Claims 2-3, 5, and 9-20 are pending. Claim 2 has been amended.
Response to Amendments
The Examiner acknowledges Applicant's response filed on 3/27/2026 containing amendments and remarks to the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 2-3, 5, and 9-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 2-3, 5, and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bahrani (US 4,571,924) in view of Atchley et al. (US 2012/0031414 A1), Aindow et al. (US 5,934,043), and Sass (US 4,233,994).
Regarding claim 2, Bahrani discloses a method of making an oral product comprising:
applying a vacuum (“vacuum”, Col. 4, Line 43) to draw a first material (“first web of porous material 15”, Figs. 1 and 4, Col. 6, Line 10) against a first surface (“outer compartment-forming surface 53”, Figs. 1 and 4, Col. 4, Line 31) of a drum (“outer rotatable mold-depositing drum 52”, Fig. 1, Col. 4, Lines 29-30);
depositing a product portion (“product P”, Fig. 1, Col. 7, Line 5) on the first material (“web 15 will be rotated beneath the feeder device 84 where a predetermined quantity of inner product P can be deposited on the upper surface thereof”, Fig. 1, Col. 6, Line 67 to Col. 7, Line 2);
applying a second material (“upper web 16”, Fig. 1, Col. 10, Line 9) on the first material (“Upper web 16 is then brought into a path of travel tangent to the outer periphery of forming surface 53 and laminated to the upper surface of lower web 15”, Col. 10, Lines 9-11) such that the product portion is between the first material and the second material (Fig. 8);
forming the oral product by rotating a heated roller (“lamination roll 36”, Fig. 1, Col. 10, Line 14, which may use “heat seal bonding”, Col. 10, Lines 2-4) against the first surface to heat seal the first and second materials such that the product portion is enclosed between the first and second materials; and
wherein the heated roller includes a second surface defining a first recess, the product portion being at least partially in the first recess during the forming (Bahrani discloses that “Lamination roll 36 might be a male embossing-type laminator”, Col. 10, Line 15-16, the embosser is the second surface that defines the recess in which the product portion is placed during the forming).
However, Bahrani does not explicitly disclose that the first and second materials comprise a plurality of nonwoven fibers.
Atchley, in the same field of endeavor, discloses that materials for making oral products may be made of a plurality of nonwoven polymeric fibers (“nonwoven polymeric fabrics”, ¶ 0008). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to using nonwoven polymeric fibers in oral products as a heat seal can bind the polymers of the first and second materials together without the need for a separate adhesive between the materials (see ¶ 0064-0066). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have used the nonwoven polymeric fibers taught by Atchley as the first and second materials in the method taught by Bahrani in order to achieve this benefit.
Bahrani does not disclose that the heated roller concurrently heat seals and heat cuts the first and second materials.
Aindow, in the same field of endeavor, discloses using a roller which simultaneously heat seals and heat cuts the materials of an oral product (“The web may be simultaneously sealed and cut by means of a modified drum (202) having sealer/cutter elements (208, 210)”, Abstract, Fig. 14; “The pressure and heat generated between the shoulder 210 . . . causes sealing . . . . The edge 208 provides a localised increased action . . . sufficient to sever the web”, Col. 9, Lines 25-33). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to forming the heat sealing and heat cutting means on the same roller in that it reduces the total number of rollers needed to practice the method (“avoids the need for separate sealing rollers”, Col. 9, Lines 5-6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the heated roller taught by Bahrani to include heat cutting elements as taught by Aindow to concurrently heat seal and heat cut the first and second materials in order to achieve this benefit.
Bahrani does not disclose that the first recess is in the second surface of the heated roller.
Sass, in the same field of endeavor, discloses using two drums with complementary recesses (“two drums 23, 24 formed with recesses 3 and 4 respectively”, Col. 4, Lines 59-60, “At station E, the same core 2 stamps a second half wrapping strip 14 previously positioned and maintained also through suction over the complementary recess 4 of the second drum 24.”, Col. 5, Lines 6-9, see Fig. 2). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to including complementary recesses in each of the drums in that it allows a larger product portion to be enclosed without compressing the product portion (as shown in Sass Fig. 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the heated roller of Bahrani to include a recess complementary to the recess in the drum of Bahrani, as taught by Sass, in order to obtain this benefit. Therefore, in the combination, the first recess is in the second surface of the heat roller.
Regarding claim 3, Bahrani in view of Atchley, Aindow, and Sass teaches the method of claim 2, as stated above. Bahrani further discloses that the first surface defines a recess (recess in the top of first surface 53 as shown in Fig. 4 adjacent to the first recess of claim 2), the product being at least partially in the recess (see Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 5, Bahrani in view of Atchley, Aindow, and Sass teaches the method of claim 2, as stated above. Bahrani further discloses that the first surface defines a second recess (recess in the top of first surface 53 as shown in Fig. 4 adjacent to the first recess of claim 2), the product being at least partially in the second recess (see Fig. 6), and
the second recess aligned with the first recess during forming (as discussed in the rejection of claim 2 above, the recesses are complementary recesses, as taught by Sass in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 9, Bahrani in view of Atchley, Aindow, and Sass teaches the method of claim 2, as stated above. Bahrani further discloses rotating the drum (“the outer rotatable mold-depositing drum 52 is rotated”, Col. 5, Lines 5-6).
Regarding claim 10, Bahrani in view of Atchley, Aindow, and Sass teaches the method of claim 9, as stated above. Bahrani further discloses the rotating is performed concurrently with the applying the vacuum, the depositing, the applying the second material, and the forming (“It should be understood that channels 61, as well as the vacuum ducts 63, can be designed to selectively place certain apertures 59 or passageway 58 individually in fluid communication with a source of pressurized fluid or vacuum, respectively, as the outer rotatable mold-depositing drum 52 is rotated about mold-depositing core 51 during the product forming procedures”, Col. 5, Lines 1-8).
Regarding claim 11, Bahrani in view of Atchley, Aindow, and Sass teaches the method of claim 2, as stated above. Bahrani further discloses forming the product portion prior to depositing (“entry chute 84”, Fig. 1, Col. 8, Line 10, provides a step of “forming” the product portion as it gives shape to the product portion prior to depositing).
Regarding claim 12, Bahrani in view of Atchley, Aindow, and Sass teaches the method of claim 11, as stated above. Bahrani further discloses wherein forming the product portion includes molding (“entry chute 84”, Fig. 1, Col. 8, Line 10” provides a step of “molding” the product portion as it gives shape to the product portion).
Regarding claim 13, Bahrani in view of Atchley, Aindow, and Sass teaches the method of claim 2, as stated above. However, Bahrani does not explicitly disclose that the product portion includes a tobacco extract.
Atchley discloses that product portions in oral products may comprise tobacco extracts (“tobacco extracts”, ¶ 0020). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to using tobacco extracts in product portions in oral products as it allows for the delivery of nicotine to the user. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have used tobacco extracts as taught by Atchley in the product portions taught by Bahrani in order to obtain this benefit.
Regarding claim 14, Bahrani in view of Atchley, Aindow, and Sass teaches the method of claim 13, as stated above. Atchley further discloses that the tobacco extract includes nicotine (“the tobacco extracts can include nicotine”, ¶ 0020).
Regarding claim 15, Bahrani in view of Atchley, Aindow, and Sass teaches the method of claim 2, as stated above. Bahrani further discloses that the product portion includes non-tobacco cellulosic material (“product P may comprise granulated tea”, Col. 8, Lines 64-65).
Regarding claim 16, Bahrani in view of Atchley, Aindow, and Sass teaches the method of claim 15, as stated above. Bahrani further discloses that the non-tobacco cellulosic material includes tea leaves (“product P may comprise granulated tea”, Col. 8, Lines 64-65).
Regarding claim 17, Bahrani in view of Atchley, Aindow, and Sass teaches the method of claim 2, as stated above. Bahrani further discloses that the product portion includes a flavorant (“product P may comprise granulated tea”, Col. 8, Lines 64-65).
Regarding claim 18, Bahrani in view of Atchley, Aindow, and Sass teaches the method of claim 2, as stated above. Atchley further discloses that the first material and the second material each include melt-blown polymeric fibers (“melt-blown polymeric fibers”, ¶ 0055).
Regarding claim 19, Bahrani in view of Atchley, Aindow, and Sass teaches the method of claim 2, as stated above. Atchley further discloses that the first material includes a first elastomer (“polyurethane”, ¶ 0015) and the second material includes a second elastomer (“polyurethane”, ¶ 0015).
Regarding claim 20, Bahrani in view of Atchley, Aindow, and Sass teaches the method of claim 19, as stated above. Atchley further discloses that the first elastomer and the second elastomer include polyurethane (“polyurethane”, ¶ 0015).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY G CULBERT whose telephone number is (571)270-0874. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-4pm.
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, Michael H Wilson can be reached at (571)270-3882. 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.
/C.G.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1747
/KATHERINE A WILL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1747
Prosecution Insights