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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” “disclosed,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-7 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 any of Kelley et al., (hereinafter Kelley), United State Patent No. 5,356,518 and Appleford et al., (hereinafter Appleford), US Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0229773 A1.
With regard to claims 1-6, both references, Kelley and Appleford, teach a process of forming a molded product, in which a product is formed by applying/dipping/submerging a fiber suspension to a toolset, a male/female mold, having a screen covering the mold at least part of it and having the shape of the product to be made, a vacuum is applied to the mold to add and retain the fibers on the screen (reading on claim 1), then the mold is taken from the suspension and passed to another mold having opposite shape of the other mold, a male/female mold (reading on claims 2-3 and 6) and the shape of the product to be formed/made, to compress the fibers on the screen and dewater them, the compressing between the molds decrease also the thickness of the wet product (reading on claim 5) and then applying heat to dry to form the final product (reading on claim 4); see paragraph bridging columns 2 and 3 and column 3, line 31 through column 6, line 45 of Kelley and ¶-[0022]-[0030], [0038]-[0040], [0062]-[0064] and figures 2-4 of Appleford. Note that Kelly shows a male mold as the one which is dipped into the fiber suspension/slurry and a female mold as the ones compressing the suspension, while Appleford shows the opposite, first the female mold and then the male mold which dewaters, pressing the suspension on the screen. Note that although the references do not use the word “capsule” a capsule is by definition a small container and therefore, the references teach containers and packages of any desired dimension and shape and thus reading on said word. Moreover, a preamble is not a limitation if it merely states a purpose or intended use and the remainder of the claim completely defines the invention. See Diversitech Corp. vs Century Steps Inc., 7 USPQ 2d 1315 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
Regarding to claim 7, both references teach the use of a third stage in which the wet products is pressed and dried; see figure 1 and column 5, lines 38-51, of Kelley in which the third mold is the combination of the female and male molds; and figures 2-4 and ¶-[[0061]-[0064] of Appleford which show the different stages and molds, including a printing stage, used to made the final product.
It seems that the references teach all the limitations of the claims or at the very least the minor modification(s) to obtain the claimed invention would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure in the art of “Process of Making Pulp Products.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE A FORTUNA whose telephone number is (571)272-1188. The examiner can normally be reached MONDAY- FRIDAY 11:30 PM- 9:00 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.
/JOSE A FORTUNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748
JAF