Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/086,963

DEVICE FOR DRAWING FILAMENTS TO FORM A NONWOVEN FABRIC

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 22, 2022
Examiner
MELENDEZ, ARMAND
Art Unit
1759
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Oerlikon Textile GmbH & Co. Kg
OA Round
4 (Final)
47%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 47% of resolved cases
47%
Career Allow Rate
163 granted / 350 resolved
-18.4% vs TC avg
Strong +43% interview lift
Without
With
+42.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
394
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
53.4%
+13.4% vs TC avg
§102
15.3%
-24.7% vs TC avg
§112
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 350 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/3/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive to the extent they apply to the current rejection. Applicant argues that the configuration of the deflector in Akiyama would not disclose the positioning of the deflector on the sidewall and extending horizontally in the instant invention. The examiner reminds applicant, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). Furthermore, having the deflector be vertically arranged as opposed to horizontally is a mere rearrangement of part, generally recognized to be obvious, see MPEP 2144.04 VI C. The examiner has provided figures from Akiyama and the instant invention below with the respective portion of Akiyama rotated 90 degrees. As can be readily seen, from this perspective the deflector has the same orientation as that of the instant invention and in both cases the deflector is arranged such that it extends perpendicularly to the inlet of the air. One of ordinary skill in the art would certainly be cognizant that the important feature is the relationship between the deflector and the inlet. Thus, looking at the invention of Akiyama, on of ordinary skill in the art would be able to surmise the arrangement of the deflector of instant invention as a mere rearrangement in part. PNG media_image1.png 208 200 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 120 208 media_image2.png Greyscale Similarly, placing the rectification chamber horizontally to the air chamber is a mere rearrangement of part and Anderson once viewed from the direction of the air inlet actually does place the rectification chamber horizontally to the air chamber. Hence, applicant’s arguments are once again a bodily incorporation. The examiner provides a rotated figure of Anderson and that of the instant invention below. PNG media_image3.png 356 188 media_image3.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 222 414 media_image4.png Greyscale The examiner confirms that the indication of a restriction requirement on the previous office action summary form was just a typographical error. 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. Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Akiyama (US 4064605) in view of Anderson (US 5219582). As to claim 1, Akiyama teaches a device for drawing filaments to form a nonwoven fabric [Abstract], having a nozzle carrier [Fig 1], the nozzle carrier having an elongated drawing channel, wherein the drawing channel comprises a filament inlet and a filament outlet (6), wherein the drawing channel has on its opposite sides an air nozzle generating a downward air flow, wherein the air nozzle communicates with an air chamber (11, 12) on both sides of the nozzle carrier through an air channel (5),The air channel is inclined downwardly such that the air leaves the air nozzle in a downwardly inclined orientation as depicted by the curved downward arrows [Fig 1, 2]. Akiyama teaches a web forming belt arranged below the nozzle carrier [Fig 1]. Akiyama teaches e the air chamber is provided with a deflector (the middle wall) between an inlet port and an outlet port and the deflector has its first end fixed to a first side wall of the air chamber near the rectification chamber and extends in a horizontal direction, a second end of the deflector is spaced from a second side wall of the air chamber opposite to the first side wall [Fig 2]. Furthermore, having the deflector be vertically arranged as opposed to horizontally is a mere rearrangement of part, generally recognized to be obvious, see MPEP 2144.04 VI C. Akiyama does not explicitly state that the rectification wall of the at least one rectification chamber is provided to be partially ventilated. Anderson teaches a method of producing melt spun fibers [Abstract] wherein a rectification device (16, 15) is provided between the air channel (30) and the air chamber (18); air flow passes from the air chamber (18) through the rectification device (16, 15) and enters the air channel through the air channel inlet (surface of 30 next to 15); the rectification device has at least one rectification chamber (17); a rectification wall (16 or 15) of the at least one rectification chamber is provided to be partially ventilated [Fig 2, col 3 line 1-30]. The rectification wall (16 or 15) of the at least one rectification chamber is provided to be partially ventilated as this distributes the air uniformly and controls the air velocity [Fig 2, col 3 line 1-30]. The rectification chamber is placed horizontally relative to the air chamber when viewed from the direction of the air inlet. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have altered the invention of Akiyama and included a rectification chamber have ventilated rectification walls and place it horizontally relative to the air chamber, as suggested by Anderson, in order to uniformly distribute the air and control its velocity. As to claim 2, Akiyama does not teach the ventilated area of at least one of the rectification walls is provided staggered from the ventilated area of the other rectification wall. Anderson teaches a method of producing melt spun fibers [Abstract]. Anderson teaches the ventilated area of at least one of the rectification walls (15) is provided staggered from the ventilated area of the other rectification wall (16) as this distributes the air uniformly and controls the air velocity [Fig 2, col 3 line 1-30]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have altered the invention of Akiyama and had the ventilated area of at least one of the rectification walls is provided staggered from the ventilated area of the other rectification wall, as suggested by Anderson, in order to uniformly distribute the air and control its velocity. As to claim 3, Akiyama does not explicitly state Anderson teaches the rectification device has one rectification chamber; the rectification chamber is provided with a ventilated area in a first position of the rectification wall thereof away from the air chamber corresponding to an air channel inlet; the rectification chamber has an air inlet at a position staggered from the first position of the rectification wall near the air chamber. Anderson teaches a method of producing melt spun fibers [Abstract].Anderson teaches the rectification device has one rectification chamber (17); the rectification chamber is provided with a ventilated area in a first position (the entirety of porous portion of 15) of the rectification wall (15) thereof away from the air chamber corresponding to an air channel inlet (30); the rectification chamber has an air inlet (channels through 16) at a position staggered from the first position of the rectification wall near the air chamber [Fig 2]. This distributes the air uniformly and controls the air velocity [Fig 2, col 3 line 1-30]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have altered the invention of Akiyama and had the rectification device has one rectification chamber; the rectification chamber is provided with a ventilated area in a first position of the rectification wall thereof away from the air chamber corresponding to an air channel inlet; the rectification chamber has an air inlet at a position staggered from the first position of the rectification wall near the air chamber, as suggested by Anderson, in order to uniformly distribute the air and control its velocity. Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being over by Akiyama (US 4064605) in view of Anderson (US 5219582), as applied to claims 1-3, 7 above, and in further view of Pendlebury (US 3999910). As to claim 4, the combination of Akiyama and Anderson teaches in the rectification chamber away from the air chamber, its rectification wall (15) close to the air channel has an ventilated area in a first position corresponding to the air channel inlet and the other the rectification wall (16) is provided with a ventilated area at a second position staggered from the first position[Fig 2] as explained above. Akiyama does not explicitly state the rectification device has two rectification chambers; in the rectification chamber away from the air chamber, in the rectification chamber closest to the air chamber, its rectification wall close to the air chamber has an air inlet at a third position corresponding to the second position of the rectification wall. Pendlebury teaches an apparatus for quenching melt spun fibers [Abstract] wherein there are 2 rectifying chambers (19 and either of 12A, 12B) rectifying wall phrased as a perforated plate (28) is placed adjacent to a honeycomb plate (32) in order to allow for better distribution of the gas and control of gas velocity and the ventilating portion of 28 (is entire surface corresponds to the inlet (21) [Fig 1B, 2, col 5 line 18- col 6 line 60]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have altered the invention of Akiyama and included the rectification device has two rectification chambers; in the rectification chamber away from the air chamber, in the rectification chamber closest to the air chamber, its rectification wall close to the air chamber has an air inlet at a third position corresponding to the second position of the rectification wall, as suggested by Pendlebury, in order to allow for better distribution of the gas and control of gas velocity. As to claim 5, Akiyama does not explicitly state the rectification chamber is further provided with a honeycomb plate between the rectification chamber and the air channel. Pendlebury teaches an apparatus for quenching melt spun fibers [Abstract] wherein the rectifying wall phrased as a perforated plate (28) is placed adjacent to a honeycomb plate (32) in order to allow for better distribution of the gas and control of gas velocity [Fig 1B, 2, col 5 line 18- col 6 line 60]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have altered the invention of Akiyama and included a honeycomb plate after the rectification wall before the air channel, as suggested by Pendlebury, in order to allow for better distribution of the gas and control of gas velocity. As to claim 7, Akiyama teaches the air chambers are plural (11, 12) and are placed side by side, each of the air chambers is connected to an air duct (9) through a connecting tube (10) [Fig 2]. 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 ARMAND MELENDEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-0342. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM- 6 PM Monday-Friday. 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, Curtis Mayes can be reached on 571-272-1234. 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. /ARMAND MELENDEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 22, 2022
Application Filed
Dec 22, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 28, 2025
Response Filed
Jun 04, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jun 09, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 10, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 05, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 21, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 26, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 03, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 06, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600067
INJECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594711
RECIPROCATING INJECTION UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594702
MACHINE AND METHOD FOR INJECTION MOLDING MULTILAYER ARTICLES HAVING A HIGH PROPORTION OF INTERNAL LAYER MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12533836
INJECTION MOLDING UNIT FOR AN INJECTION MOLDING MACHINE FOR PROCESSING PLASTICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12528238
DRIVE MECHANISM, INJECTION APPARATUS, AND INJECTION MOLDING MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
47%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+42.7%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 350 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month