Detailed Office Action
The communication dated 4/27/2026 has been entered and full considered.
Claims 8-10 have been amended. Claims 23 and 24 are new.
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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14 and 21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
In light of amendment the objection to claim 8 has been withdrawn.
Applicant argues that in GIORDANO the blow valve is positioned downstream of the reactor vessel and separated by a channel and a feedstock distribution device. The applicant argues the blow valve is not part of the housing nor is it ‘integrated’ into a pressure lock forming part of the housing. Applicant argues that the claimed requires structural integration.
In response the claim states the following “the outlet of the housing being part of an outlet pressure lock configured”. The claim does not state that it is integral. The claim does not disallow a pipe section. In fact the applicant’s own drawings have a pipe section after the vessel and before the ‘outlet pressure lock’ which comprises valves (118a) and 131(a). Likewise, the prior art also has a pipe space between the ‘outlet pressure lock’ which comprises the feedstock distribution and the blow valve.
PNG
media_image1.png
590
751
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The specification does not have support for or mention ‘integration’. Further, in practice, the actual vessel would have a flange connection to the top of 118(a) and be bolted on.
Applicant argues that GIORDANO does not disclose a multi-stage pressure lock in the outlet and that it only teaches a blow valve.
The Examiner disagrees GIORDANO feedstock distribution then a space and then the blow valve. The feedstock distribution device acts as pressure isolation [0068] to sequentially discharge the treated wood. The two gate valves of INGOLFFSON can substitute for the plug-screw feeder of GIORDANO while the two gate valves can also substitute for the feedstock distribution device and blow valve. Both systems act to separate the pressure of the vessel from the feed pressure and the outlet pressure.
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.
Claims 1-7, 11-13, 15-17, 19, 20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over U.S. 2017/0107664 GIORDANO et al., hereinafter GIORDANO
As for claims 1, 5, 7, 20, and 22, the applicant claims that the instant apparatus is for treating fiberboard. However, this is an apparatus claim and it is not limited by the material worked upon as long as the apparatus is capable of working upon said material.
[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims."
In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); see also In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935).
As the apparatus of GIORDANO is capable of working upon lignocellulosic wood [abstract] it is also capable of working upon fiberboard.
GIORDANO discloses an internal screw transport device within a single closed housing, outlet of the housing [Figure 2, 0046]. The housing can be inclined [0046]. The housing is configured to receive steam therein via lines (S1) and (S2) [Figure 2].
GIORDANO discloses an inlet pressure lock (the plug-forming device) [0043, Figure 2] for feeding lignocellulose from atmospheric pressure to super-atmospheric pressure and an outlet pressure lock (the blow valve BV) to atmospheric pressure [0065, 0069, Figure 2]
GIORDANO discloses a pipelines (S1) and (s2) which supplies steam [0046]. GIORDANO discloses a steam generator (i.e. the steam source) including a steam boiler [0047].
GIORDANO discloses an operational temperature of 170 to 230 degrees C [0020] and a pressure of greater than 13 bar [0024]. An apparatus that can operate at a higher temperature/pressure can operate at a lower pressure temperature. GIORDANO can specifically control the pressure/temperature by the opening and closing of the valves [0047]. The Examiner notes that the converse is not necessarily true (a vessel that is designed for 2 bar operations may not be rated to operate at 10 bar pressure). Therefore GIORDANO anticipates the claimed structure of the housing.
In the alternative a change in temperature (and therefore pressure) is prima facie obvious [MPEP 2144.05 (II) (A)] absent evidence of criticality.
As for claims 2 and 12, GIORDANO discloses an internal screw transport device within a single closed housing, outlet of the housing [Figure 2, 0046]. The housing can be inclined [0046].
The reactor extends longitudinally/horizontally from left to right and the inlet is facing upwards from the housing while the outlet is facing downwards [see market up Figure 2].
As for claim 3 and 4, GIORDANO discloses that the steam (S1) and (S2) can be added to multiple places along vessel and one or more inlets and valves and discloses a specific instance of two valves/steam lines [Figure 2, 0047].
As for claim 6, GIORDANO discloses a motor to operate the screw [0046]
As for claim 11, GIORDANO discloses an incline [0046]. GIORDANO discloses a preferable angle of the outlet being lower than the inlet [0046]. However, “preferable” also suggests that the inlet can be lower than the outlet the inlet end is located lower than the outlet end.
As for claim 13, GIORDANO discloses a cyclone wherein steam escapes from the steam exploded fiber [0069], thereby drying the fiber.
As for claim 15-17, the type of material worked upon does not limit the claim as long as the apparatus is capable of working upon said material. Further, the method of operating the apparatus does not limit the claim as long as the apparatus is capable of being operated
As for claim 19, GIORDANO discloses two steam inlets (V1 and V2) [Figure 2].
As for claims 23, the applicant claims that the instant apparatus is for treating fiberboard. However, this is an apparatus claim and it is not limited by the material worked upon as long as the apparatus is capable of working upon said material.
[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims."
In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); see also In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935).
As the apparatus of GIORDANO is capable of working upon lignocellulosic wood [abstract] it is also capable of working upon fiberboard.
GIORDANO discloses an internal screw transport device within a single closed housing, outlet of the housing [Figure 2, 0046]. The housing can be inclined [0046]. The housing is configured to receive steam therein via lines (S1) and (S2) [Figure 2].
GIORDANO discloses an inlet pressure lock (the plug-forming device) [0043, Figure 2] for feeding lignocellulose from atmospheric pressure to super-atmospheric pressure and an outlet pressure lock (the blow valve BV) to atmospheric pressure [0065, 0069, Figure 2]
GIORDANO discloses a pipelines (S1) and (s2) which supplies steam [0046]. GIORDANO discloses a steam generator (i.e. the steam source) including a steam boiler [0047].
GIORDANO discloses an operational temperature of 170 to 230 degrees C [0020] and a pressure of greater than 13 bar [0024]. An apparatus that can operate at a higher temperature/pressure can operate at a lower pressure temperature. GIORDANO can specifically control the pressure/temperature by the opening and closing of the valves [0047]. The Examiner notes that the converse is not necessarily true (a vessel that is designed for 2 bar operations may not be rated to operate at 10 bar pressure). Therefore GIORDANO anticipates the claimed structure of the housing.
GIORDANO discloses an incline [0046]. GIORDANO discloses a preferable angle of the outlet being lower than the inlet [0046]. However, “preferable” also suggests that the inlet can be lower than the outlet the inlet end is located lower than the outlet end.
Claims 8-10, 18, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over U.S. 2017/0107664 GIORDANO et al., hereinafter GIORDANO, in view of U.S. 2022/0145535 INGOLFSSON, hereinafter INGOLFSSON
As for claims 8-10, 18, and 24, GIORDANO teaches the features as per supra. GIORDANO discloses that the feed to vessel comprises a pressure sealing device which can be a plug screen feeder [Figure 2, 0043]. GIORDANO discloses that a valve is used for the outlet sealing device [Figure 2 BV]; prior to the BV is a feed distribution device. GIORDANO does not disclose a two-valve system for feeding material into the vessel with knife gate valves, and intermediate chamber, and pressure adjusting in said chamber or a valve system for exiting the steaming chamber or an air inlet.
INGOLFFSON discloses a vessel loading system a two-valve system with an inlet valve (1320) and an outlet valve (1327) and an intermediate section (1330) with steam/pressurized air (1322-1324) [Figure 5, 0084; pressurized air requires a pressurized air generator]. The valves can be knife-gate valves [0021]. At the time of the invention it would be obvious to substitute the known pressure sealing feed/outlet device of INGOLFSSON for the pressure sealing feed/outlet devices of GIORDANO. The person of ordinary skill in the art would expect success INGOLFSSON states that the its pressure sealing feed device is useable with steam explosion reactors [abstract] which is the type of reactor GIORDANO is teaching.
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 ANTHONY J CALANDRA whose telephone number is (571)270-5124. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:45 AM -4:15 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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at (571)270-7457. 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.
ANTHONY J. CALANDRA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1748
/Anthony Calandra/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748
Prosecution Insights