DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election with traverse of claims 5-8 and 10-11 in the reply filed on 1/29/2026 is acknowledged. However, since the traversal was not accompanied by any arguments, the election is taken to be made without traverse.
Claims 1-4, 9, and 12 are withdrawn from consideration.
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.
Claim(s) 5-8, 10, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Rosa (FR 3001957 A1) in view of Song (US 20110311798 A1).
Regarding claim 5, De Rosa discloses a covering element for containers (12), the covering element being made of dried wood and being attached to an opening or a neck of a container (abstract), the covering element including a body (14) that defines a cavity (Fig. 3: cavity for the neck 16) having walls (Fig. 3 shows a plurality of inner walls that forms an interior of the body 14) inside which the opening and the neck (16) of the container are provided, and attachment means (sleeve 36) of the walls to the opening or the neck, the attachment means consisting of at least one strap (36).
De Rosa fails to disclose:
wherein the dried wood has an equilibrium moisture content of 8-10%; and
the covering element being made by the following process:
a first stage of placing the wood in an oven at a temperature between 40-50°C and a relative humidity between 40-50%, for a period between 1 and 3 weeks, until the wood reaches an equilibrium moisture content between 25%-4 %,
a second stage of placing the wood in the oven at a temperature between 45-55°C and a relative humidity between 45-55%, for a period between 4 and 15 days, until the wood reaches an equilibrium moisture content between 16%-25%,
a third stage of placing the wood in the oven at a temperature between 50-60°C and a relative humidity between 30-40 %, for a period between 4 and 15 days, until the wood reaches an equilibrium moisture content between 10%-16%,
a fourth stage of allowing the wood to rest at a controlled temperature between 18-25°C, between 2 and 4 weeks, wherein the wood recovers part of the equilibrium moisture lost in the third stage and stabilizes,
a fifth stage of placing the wood in the oven at a temperature between 50-60°C and a relative humidity between 25-35%, for a period between 4 and 15 days until the wood reaches an equilibrium moisture content between 10%-16%,
a sixth stage of placing the wood in the oven at a temperature between 40-50°C and a relative humidity between 20-30%, for a period between 4 and 15 days, until the wood reaches an equilibrium moisture content between 6%-8%, and
a seventh stage of allowing the wood to rest at a controlled temperature between 18-25°C, for a period between 3 and 5 weeks, whereat the wood recovers between 1.5 and 2.5% equilibrium humidity, the remains of temperature dissipate and the wood stabilizes having a final humidity equilibrium between 8%-10%.
Song teaches dried wood having an equilibrium moisture content of 8-10% (see claim 24). It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art at the time of effective filing of the application to modify De Rosa wherein the dried wood has an equilibrium moisture content of 8-10%. The motivation to combine is so that reconstituted wood can be used to make the covering element, resulting in an environmentally-friendly process (see paras. 2-6 of Song).
Regarding the process limitations, Applicant is reminded that “even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” See MPEP 2113(I).
In this case, the claimed process produces wood having an equilibrium moisture content of 8-10%. Song teaches wood having an equilibrium moisture content of 8-10%; therefore, it is the same or substantially identical to the wood produced by the claimed process.
Regarding claim 6, modified De Rosa discloses the covering element according claim 5, wherein the walls comprise a recess formed behind the strap (Fig. 3 shows a strap inserted into the opening of the neck 16, and a recess between the strap and the threaded inner bore 38 for insertion of the neck 16)
Regarding claim 7, modified De Rosa discloses (see De Rosa) the covering element according to claim 5, wherein the strap, which is at least one in number, comprises at least one bulge that fits in the neck of the container (Fig. 3 shows a bulge inserted into the opening of the neck 16).
Regarding claim 8, modified De Rosa discloses (see De Rosa) the covering element according to claim 5, wherein the walls comprise positioning elements (Fig. 3: threads 40) of the neck.
Regarding claim 10, modified De Rosa discloses (see De Rosa) the covering element according to claim 6, wherein the strap, which is at least one in number, comprises at least one bulge that fits in the neck of the container (Fig. 3 shows a bulge inserted into the opening of the neck 16).
Regarding claim 11, modified De Rosa discloses (see De Rosa) the covering element according to claim 6, wherein the walls comprise positioning elements (Fig. 3: threads 40) of the neck.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON LAU whose telephone number is (571)270-7644. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, Michael Hoang can be reached at 571-272-6460. 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.
/JASON LAU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights