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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 29 September 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the method steps of clam 15 can be implemented using the apparatus of claim 1.
Applicant’s arguments were found to be persuasive. Therefore, the restriction requirement is withdrawn. All claims were examined in the present Office action.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because of the following:
Fig. 1 shows “M”s with circles. However, circles should not be used in association with numbers and letters (PCT Rule 11.13.e, MPEP 1825). It is also not clear what the “M”s represent.
“P1” and “P2” (fig. 1), “341” (fig. 13), “3421” and “343” appear in the Drawings but are not mentioned in the Specification (PCT Rule 11.13.l, MPEP 1825).
A nozzle 441 is mentioned in the Specification but does not appear in the Drawings (PCT Rule 11.13.l, MPEP 1825).
Figs. 1, 16, and 18 show brackets in association with numbers. However, brackets should not be used in association with numbers and letters (PCT Rule 11.13.e, MPEP 1825).
Fig. 1 shows the letters “LIFTER” on arrows with underlying marks. However, all letters shall be simple and clear, and underlying marks should not impede the clear reading of reference signs (PCT Rule 11.13.b and e, MPEP 1825).
Because there are a large number of reference signs, it is strongly recommended to attach a separate sheet listing all the reference signs and the features denoted by them (PCT Rule 11.13.n, MPEP 1825).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it is not in narrative form but instead uses the same phraseology as a claim. Recommend breaking up the sentence into multiple sentences. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b). A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 9 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 9, recommend amending the claim to recite: “a first food ingredient transfer housing configured to surround an interior the housing so that the interior is spatially separated from an outside of the housing.”
In claim 13, recommend amending the claim to recite: “the guide roller parts comprise.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are the following:
“first food ingredient supply apparatus” in claim 1
The generic placeholder is “apparatus” and the functional limitations are the “supply” of a “first food ingredient” and “configured to separate a single sheet .. from a … stack and supply the single sheet.”
Structure that is used from the Specification includes a suction block and a conveyor.
“second food ingredient supply apparatus” in claim 1
The generic placeholder is “apparatus” and the functional limitations are the “supply” of a “second food ingredient” and “configured to separate a single sheet .. from a … stack and supply the single sheet.”
Structure that is used from the Specification includes a suction block and a conveyor.
“pressing device” in claim 1
The generic placeholder is “device” and the functional limitations are “pressing” and “configured to form an edible food product by pressing a semi-finished product.”
Structure that is used from the Specification includes rollers.
“second food ingredient separation part” in claim 2
The generic placeholder is “part” and the functional limitations are “separation” of the “second food ingredient” and “configured to grip and move the single sheet.”
Structure that is used from the Specification includes a swing arm. Claim 3 has sufficient structure such that 112f is not invoked for the claimed “part.”
“joint agent spray device” in claim 6
The generic placeholder is “device” and the functional limitations are “joint agent spray” and “configured to spray a joining agent.”
Structure that is used from the Specification includes a nozzle.
“pressing lifting part” in claim 10
The generic placeholder is “part” and the functional limitations are “lifting” and “configured to move upward or downward”
Structure that is used from the Specification includes a shaft. Claim 11 has sufficient structure such that 112f is not invoked for the claimed “part.”
“cutting apparatus” in claim 14
The generic placeholder is “device” and the functional limitations are “cutting” and “provided to cut the edible food product…into pieces.”
Structure that is used from the Specification includes a blade.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites “a swing arm … the swing arm being configured to change a position…wherein the swing arm is coupled to the second food ingredient holding member so that a direction in which the second food ingredient holding member is arranged is constant at a position at which the single sheet of the second food ingredient is sucked and a position at which the single sheet of the second food ingredient is placed on the second food ingredient transfer part.” This limitation requires a swing arm that swings and “changes a position.” However, the limitation also requires that the swing arm that is “constant at a position.” It is unclear if the swing arm is configured to change position or is instead configured to remain at a constant position. This limitation comes from paragraph 86 of the Specification, but it is not clear from the Specification, how the swing arm is “constant at a position” (referring also to fig. 12 of the Drawings; the Specification repeats the limitation and does not offer any more details). Since there is no way of determining the meets and bounds of the configuration for the swing arm, as best understood, if the prior art comprises the claimed structure, it will be presumed that the system can operate as intended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 8-9, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US-20180271124-A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches a system (fig. 1) for manufacturing edible food products (“food materials,” abstract), the system comprising:
a first food ingredient supply apparatus (second material supply part 400, fig. 1; construed as including conveyor 101, which does not include part 100; part 400 includes second adsorption member 411, which applies a vacuum, para 0073) configured to separate a single sheet of a first food ingredient from a first food ingredient stack including a plurality of stacked first food ingredients and supply the single sheet of first food ingredient (separates and supplies a sheet 12 from a stack, figs. 6A-6b, pars 0073-0076);
a second food ingredient supply apparatus (first material supply part 200, fig. 1; construed as including part 100 of conveyor 101, but not the rest of conveyor 101; “segmented conveyors,” para 0066; a segmented conveyor for part 100 is shown in figs. 3a-b; part 200 includes first adsorption member 211, which applies vacuum, para 0063, as well as conveying member 213, para 0063 and fig. 4) configured to separate a single sheet of a second food ingredient from a second food ingredient stack including a plurality of stacked second food ingredients and supply the single sheet of second food ingredient (separates and supplies a sheet 11 from a stack, fig. 4 and paras 0062-0066); and
a pressing device (bonding part 500, fig. 1; “pressurizing roller,” para 0078) configured to form an edible food product (bonded materials 10, fig. y7) by pressing (paras 0078-0080) a semi-finished product formed by seating the supplied single sheet of the first food ingredient on the supplied single sheet of the second food ingredient (a sheet from stack 12 is placed on top of a sheet from stack 11, fig. 6b; para 0076; the pressing is described in paras 0077-0080 and shown in fig. 7).
Kim, fig. 1
PNG
media_image1.png
1155
676
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Kim teaches wherein the first food ingredient supply apparatus is disposed above the second food ingredient supply apparatus (supply part 400 is above supply part 200, fig. 1).
Regarding claim 9, Kim teaches wherein the first food ingredient supply apparatus (second material supply part 400, fig. 1; construed as including conveyor 101, which does not include part 100) comprises: a first food ingredient separation part (supply part 400, figs. 6a-b) configured to grip (“adsorb and draw the second materials 12 laminated in the second container 410 by means of vacuum,” para 0073) and move the single sheet of the first food ingredient from the first food ingredient stack (sheet 12 moves from stack, figs. 6a-b); and a first food ingredient transfer part (conveyor 101, fig. 6b) configured to transfer the single sheet of the first food ingredient, which is transferred by the first food ingredient separation part, to the pressing device (bonding part 500, fig. 7), and wherein the first food ingredient transfer part comprises a first food ingredient transfer housing (housing over the actuator 413, fig. 6a) configured to surround an interior thereof so that the interior is spatially separated from the outside (annotated below).
Kim, fig. 6a (annotated)
PNG
media_image2.png
1016
1409
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Kim teaches further comprising: a cutting apparatus (cutting part 700, fig. 1; knives 711 are construed as blades) provided to cut the edible food product (para 0085), which is unloaded from the pressing device (bonded part 500, fig. 1), into pieces of a unit product (figs. 10a-b).
Regarding claim 15, Kim teaches a method of manufacturing edible food products (“food manufacturing method,” title), the method comprising: separating a single sheet of a first food ingredient from a plurality of stacked first food ingredients (sheet 12 is separated from a stack, figs. 6a-b; paras 0073-0076); separating a single sheet of a second food ingredient from a plurality of stacked second food ingredients (sheet 11 is separated from a stack, fig. 4 and paras 0062-0066); forming a semi-finished product by seating the separated single sheet of the first food ingredient on the separated single sheet of the second food ingredient (a sheet from stack 12 is placed on top of a sheet from stack 11, fig. 6b; para 0076; the pressing is described in paras 0077-0080 and shown in fig. 7); and forming an edible food product (bonded materials 10, fig. 7) by pressing the semi-finished product (materials 11 and 12 are pressed by bonding part 500, paras 0077-0078).
Regarding claim 16, Kim teaches further comprising: producing a plurality of unit products by cutting the edible food product (figs. 10a-b).
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 2-3 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US-20180271124-A1) in view of Bando (US-20190350249-A1).
Regarding claim 2, Kim teaches wherein the second food ingredient supply apparatus (first material supply part 200, fig. 1; construed as including part 100 of conveyor 101, but not the rest of conveyor 101) comprises:
a second food ingredient separation part (adsorption member 211, fig. 4) configured to grip and move the single sheet of the second food ingredient from the second food ingredient stack (“adsorb and draw the first materials 11 laminated in the first container 210 by means of vacuum,” para 0063; fig. 4); and
a second food ingredient transfer part (conveyor 213, fig. 4 and part 100, figs. 3a-b) configured to transfer the single sheet of the second food ingredient (materials 11, fig. 4), which is transferred by the second food ingredient separation part, to the pressing device (the materials 11 is eventually transferred to the bonding part 500 via the conveyors 101, fig. 7).
Kim does not explicitly disclose a second food ingredient separation part (interpreted under 112f as including a swing arm; although Kim teaches an arm for the member 211 in fig. 4, Kim does not explicitly disclose how the arm for the member 211 moves or that the arm swings).
However, in the same field of endeavor of automated seaweed processing, Bando teaches a second food ingredient separation part (the arm 15 swings through rotary joint J1, fig. 2, para 0028).
Bando, fig. 2
PNG
media_image3.png
1247
825
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Kim, in view of the teachings of Bando, by using a rotary joint J1, as taught by Bando, to move the first adsorption member 211, as taught by Kim, in order to use a robotic arm for moving the member 211, for the advantage of using an arm that can be controlled by a robot controller using executable software, so that the desired parameters for the automated assembly line can be adjusted by simply providing user-defined inputs to the robot controller (Bando, para 0035).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Kim in view of Bando as set forth above regarding claim 2 teaches the invention of claim 3. Specifically, Kim teaches wherein the second food ingredient separation part (adsorption member 211, fig. 4) comprises: a second food ingredient holding member (adsorption member 211, fig. 4) configured to grip, by suction (“vacuum,” para 0063), the single sheet of the second food ingredient positioned at an uppermost side among the plurality of second food ingredients included in the second food ingredient stack (member 211 grips the top sheet 11 of the stack in fig. 4); and a swing arm (arm attached to member 211, fig. 4) having a distal end at which the second food ingredient holding member is disposed (member 211 is attached to the bottom left end of the arm, fig. 4; this end is construed as being the “distal end”), and wherein the swing arm is coupled to the second food ingredient holding member so that a direction in which the second food ingredient holding member is arranged (left-right or horizontal direction, fig. 4) is constant at a position at which the single sheet of the second food ingredient is sucked and a position at which the single sheet of the second food ingredient is placed on the second food ingredient transfer part (conveyor 213, fig. 4; construed such that the orientation of member 211 is “constant” along a left-right axis relative to its arm, when using the vacuum, as shown in fig. 4, and then when placing the sheet 11 on to the conveyor 213 in fig. 4; i.e., the arm rotates 180 degrees). Additionally, Bando teaches the swing arm (arm 15, fig. 2) being configured to change a position of the second food ingredient holding member by rotating (the joint J1 is a rotary joint, paras 0028 and 0031).
Regarding claim 5, Kim teaches wherein the second food ingredient transfer part (conveyor 213, fig. 4 and part 100, figs. 3a-b) comprises:
a second food ingredient conveyor (conveying plate 111, fig. 3c) configured to transfer the seated single sheet (sheet 11, fig. 3c) of the second food ingredient forward (right arrow, fig. 3a); and
a plurality of second food ingredient position fixing bars (protrusions 111a are construed as “bars,” fig. 3c) disposed on the second food ingredient conveyor (conveying plate 111, fig. 3c) and spaced apart from one another in a forward/rearward direction (fig. 3a), the plurality of second food ingredient position fixing bars protruding outward from the second food ingredient conveyor in the forward/rearward direction or an upward/downward direction (protrusions 111a protrude upward along an forward/rearward direction, fig. 3a), and
wherein an interval between the two adjacent second food ingredient position fixing bars is larger than a length of the single sheet of the second food ingredient in the forward/rearward direction (sheets 11 fit in between the protrusions 11a, fig. 3a).
Regarding claim 6, Kim teaches further comprising: a joining agent spray device (liquid application part 300, fig. 1; nozzles 311, fig. 5) disposed adjacent to the second food ingredient transfer part (conveyor 213, fig. 4 and part 100, figs. 3a-b) and configured to spray a joining agent onto an upper surface of the single sheet (sheet 11, fig. 5) of the second food ingredient transferred by the second food ingredient transfer part (para 0068).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US-20180271124-A1) in view of Bando (US-20190350249-A1) as applied to claims 1-3 above and further in view of Ikushima et al. (JP-2007300848-A, referencing foreign version for drawings and provided English translation for written disclosure).
Kim teaches wherein the second food ingredient separation part (adsorption member 211, fig. 4) moves the single sheet of the second food ingredient forward (sheet 11 moves to the right onto the conveyor, fig. 4; para 0063). Kim does not explicitly disclose wherein the second food ingredient holding member comprises three second food ingredient suction heads, and wherein among the three second food ingredient suction heads, two second food ingredient suction heads are disposed to be spaced apart from each other in a leftward/rightward direction orthogonal to a forward/rearward direction, and one second food ingredient suction head is disposed forward of the two second food ingredient suction heads.
However, in the same field of endeavor of automated seaweed processing, Ikushima teaches wherein the second food ingredient holding member (absorbing means 103, fig. 6) comprises three second food ingredient suction heads (bottom three chambers 103c and suction portions 103a, fig. 6a), and wherein among the three second food ingredient suction heads, two second food ingredient suction heads are disposed to be spaced apart from each other in a leftward/rightward direction orthogonal to a forward/rearward direction (bottom two are spaced horizontally, annotated fig. 6a), and one second food ingredient suction head is disposed forward of the two second food ingredient suction heads (second from the top is forward from the bottom, annotated fig. 6a).
Ikushima (annotated)
PNG
media_image4.png
655
620
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Kim, in view of the teachings of Ikushima, by using an absorbing means 103, as taught by Ikushima, instead of the adsorption member 211, as taught by Kim, in order to use a suction unit with multiple suction portions such that the absorbing force on the piece of seaweed is applied in an orthogonal direction and is applied in a uniform manner through the suction portions, which prevents the adsorbing means from damaging the seaweed when suction is applied (Ikushima, pages 4-5; left-right in fig. 6a of Ikushima is up-down in fig. 4 of Kim).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US-20180271124-A1) in view of Bando (US-20190350249-A1) as applied to claims 1-3 above and further in view of Kang et al. (KR-101769345-B1, referencing foreign version for drawings and provided English translation for written disclosure).
Kim teaches wherein the second food ingredient transfer part (conveyor 213, fig. 4 and part 100, figs. 3a-b) comprises a second food ingredient conveyor (conveyor 213, fig. 4) configured to transfer the seated single sheet of the second food ingredient forward (sheet 11 to the right, fig. 4; para 0063).
Kim does not explicitly disclose wherein the second food ingredient conveyor comprises a second food ingredient belt, and a second food ingredient roller configured to rotate the second food ingredient belt, and wherein the second food ingredient belt is formed to come into contact with a part of the second food ingredient without coming into contact with another part of the second food ingredient.
However, in the same field of endeavor of automated seaweed processing, Kang teaches wherein the second food ingredient conveyor (fig. 3) comprises a second food ingredient belt (belt 15, fig. 3), and a second food ingredient roller (roller 375b, fig. 3) configured to rotate the second food ingredient belt (“lifted up on an upper surface by a roller,” page 6), and wherein the second food ingredient belt is formed to come into contact with a part of the second food ingredient without coming into contact with another part of the second food ingredient (“conveying line 15 is formed so as to serve as a conveyor belt for conveying an object,” page 6; fig 4 shows how there is a portion of the object that comes into contact with the belts and there is another portion of the object that does not come into contact with the belts because the belts are narrow).
Kang, fig. 3
PNG
media_image5.png
438
714
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Kim, in view of the teachings of Kang, by using the laminating apparatus, as taught by Kang in fig. 3, instead of the conveyor 213, as taught by Kim, in order to use a conveying apparatus that is in a portable box shape and that can overlap with an existing conveying line to fully automate an assembly line for manufacturing seaweed products, which reduces production costs and improves productivity (Kang, page 6).
Claims 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US-20180271124-A1) in view of Wu et al. (CN-109673978-A, referencing foreign version for drawings and provided English translation for written disclosure).
Regarding claim 10, Kim teaches wherein the pressing device (bonding part 500, fig. 7) comprises:
a pressing lifting part (actuator 511, fig. 7) disposed at a position spaced apart upward from the pressing base part (the base part is construed as being under the conveyor 101, fig. 7) and configured to move upward or downward relative to the pressing base part (“up and down,” para 0078);
a pressing roller part (“pressurizing roller,” para 0078; construed as being the pressurized member 510, fig. 7) coupled to the pressing lifting part (actuator 511, fig. 7) and configured to be rotatable about an axis (a roller is construed as being rotatable about an axis) defined in a leftward/rightward direction (depth direction, fig. 7) so as to press downward the semi-finished product that passes a lower side of the pressing roller part (“pressurize the top surfaces of the bonded materials 10 through rolling contact,” para 0078).
Kim does not explicitly disclose a pressing base part provided such that the semi-finished product moves forward along an upper surface of the pressing base part; a pressing rail extending in a forward/rearward direction to prevent the semi-finished product from being wound around the pressing roller part.
However, in the same field of endeavor of automated seaweed processing, Wu teaches a pressing base part (roller 53, fig. 7) provided such that the semi-finished product (“nori,” page 9; nori is a type of seaweed) moves forward along an upper surface of the pressing base part (upper surface of roller 53, fig. 7); a pressing rail (tableting 42, figs. 5 and 7; “crescent,” page 9; construed as pressing rails) extending in a forward/rearward direction (horizontal direction, fig. 7) to prevent the semi-finished product from being wound around the pressing roller part (“Without roll banding,” page 9).
Wu, fig. 7
PNG
media_image6.png
736
796
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Kim, in view of the teachings of Wu, by using the roller group 50 and tableting 42, as taught by Wu, in the bonding part 500, as taught by Kim, in order to press the bottom surface of the seaweed, ensuring that the seaweed is flat and ready for packaging as a result of being pressed by both an upper roller and a lower roller, and by using the tableting 42 on the bottom surface of the top roller, to ensure that the seaweed does not adhere to the top roller as it is being pressed (Wu, pages 8-9).
Regarding claim 11, Kim teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the pressing roller comprises: a pressing shaft member coupled to the pressing lifting part and configured to be rotatable about an axis defined in the leftward/rightward direction; and a plurality of pressing rollers disposed on the pressing shaft member so as to be spaced apart from one another in the leftward/rightward direction, and wherein the pressing rail is disposed between the plurality of pressing rollers.
However, in the same field of endeavor of automated seaweed processing, Wu teaches wherein the pressing roller (roller 10, fig. 7) comprises: a pressing shaft member (“center shaft,” page 8 between ends of rack 30, fig. 5) coupled to the pressing lifting part (the roller 10 is construed as being coupled to the actuator 511 taught by Kim) and configured to be rotatable about an axis defined in the leftward/rightward direction (rollers 10 are rotatable about an axis from left to right, fig. 5); and a plurality of pressing rollers (two rollers 10, fig. 5) disposed on the pressing shaft member so as to be spaced apart from one another in the leftward/rightward direction (horizontal direction, fig. 5), and wherein the pressing rail (tableting 42, fig. 5) is disposed between the plurality of pressing rollers (8 tableting 42 are positioned between the rollers 10, fig. 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Kim, in view of the teachings of Wu, by using the rollers 10, as taught by Wu, instead of the pressured roller 510, as taught by Kim, in order to press the top surface of the seaweed, ensuring that the seaweed is flat and ready for packaging as a result of being pressed by both an upper roller and a lower roller (Wu, pages 8-9).
Regarding claim 12, Kim teaches the invention as described above but doe not explicitly disclose wherein the pressing device further comprises a plurality of guide roller parts rotatably disposed at a position spaced apart upward from the pressing base part to guide the semi-finished product between the pressing roller part and the pressing base part.
However, in the same field of endeavor of automated seaweed processing, Wu teaches wherein the pressing device (rollers 10, fig. 5) further comprises a plurality of guide roller parts (annular stria 11 and 12, fig. 6 and “center shaft,” page 8; the annular stria 11 are construed as grooves and the annular stria 12 are construed as collar flanges) rotatably disposed at a position spaced apart upward from the pressing base part (roller 53, fig. 7) to guide the semi-finished product between the pressing roller part and the pressing base part (page 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Kim, in view of the teachings of Wu, by using grooves 11 and collar flanges 12 on the rollers 10, as taught by Wu, which are used instead of the pressured roller 510, as taught by Kim, in order to press the top surface of the seaweed, ensuring that the seaweed is flat and ready for packaging as a result of being pressed by both an upper roller and a lower roller, and by using the tableting 42 that fit into the grooves 11 on the bottom surface of the top roller 10, to ensure that the seaweed does not adhere to the top roller as it is being pressed (Wu, pages 8-9).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Kim in view of Wu as set forth above regarding claim 12 teaches the invention of claim 13. Specifically, Wu teaches wherein the plurality of guide roller parts (annular stria 11 and 12, fig. 6, and “center shaft,” page 8; the annular stria 11 are construed as grooves and the annular stria 12 are construed as collar flanges) is disposed to be spaced apart from one another in the forward/rearward direction (stria 11 is spaced apart from stria 12 and from the central shaft in the horizontal direction, fig. 7), wherein the guide roller part comprises: a guide shaft member (“center shaft,” page 8) disposed to be rotatable about an axis (“central axis,” page 8) defined in the leftward/rightward direction (shaft is in the left/right direction between the ends of rack 30, fig. 5); and a plurality of guide rollers (annular stria 11 and 12, fig. 6) coupled to the guide shaft member (central shaft in middle of roller 10, fig. 6) so as to be spaced apart from one another in the leftward/rightward direction (horizontal direction, fig. 6), and wherein regions occupied by the guide rollers included in the adjacent guide roller parts overlap one another at one portion and do not overlap one another at another portion when viewed in the forward/rearward direction (portions of the stria 11 and 12 overlap when viewed from the direction shown in fig. 7 but not in the view shown in fig. 6).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Suzuki et al. (US-20030190394-A1) teach an apparatus for toasting sheets of laver.
Chang et al. (US-20240083059-A1) teach an invention similar to the Instant Application.
Chen et al. (US-20240277004-A1) teach protein compositions products.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERWIN J WUNDERLICH whose telephone number is (571)272-6995. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:30.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached at 571-272-5567. 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.
/ERWIN J WUNDERLICH/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 1/29/2026