DETAILED ACTION
Claims 3-12 are pending. Claims 3-12 are amended. Claims 1 and 2 are cancelled.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on December 31, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on December 31, 2025. As directed by the amendment: claims 3-12 have been amended and claims 1and 2 have been cancelled. Thus, claims 3-12 are presently pending in this application.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome some of the 35 USC §112(b) rejections and introduced others.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 3 has been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 3-12 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claims 3-12 are not rejected utilizing art because the claims and specification do not permit a complete search due to the lack of clarity.
Claim 3 recites “twisting means” which as previously indicated is interpreted as “ring spinning machine” or “two for one twisting machine”. Thus claim 3 includes a delivery spool and a ring spinning machine or two for one twisting machine that applies a twist value to the yarn (H) of (Ω) tpm = 2/(ID1)*3.1416, where ID1 is the instant diameter and imparts a twist value of “rolled yarn” along a full spool that is variable and associated with the instant diameter of the spool (1) and is equivalent to α (tpm) = 1/ (ID * π). Thus the twisting means must apply a first twist value to the yarn, that is tied to instant diameter of the spool AND apply a second different twist value to the yarn that is also tied to the instant diameter of the (full) spool. It is unclear how the twisting means can apply two different twisting values to the yarn that both are based on the instant diameter. These values are both with respect to the spool (1) and appear to be relevant for the entire winding process. These two equations are in conflict with each other and preclude art-based examination of the claims.
As best can be determined by the Examiner, the claim is attempting to recite a specific scenario of yarn in which the yarn is placed on a spool such that the twisting value is 1/pi*ID, which would be 1/circumference of the spool. An untwisted yarn would gain a twist per circumferential placement on a spool and thus this is an inherent increase when placed on the spool. If the yarn is unwound in the same direction, the yarn would remain untwisted, if the yarn is unwound in the opposite direction the twist would be 2/C, which is inherent. Furthermore, there is no required structure recited and thus it appears that any ring spinner and/or two for one twister would be capable of working as claimed, because the claim is to a twisting machine rather than a method of making.
Claim 3 recites “that apply to the machine a twist value to the yarn (H)” in lines 3-4. It is unclear what is meant by this phrase. The twisting means are part of the yarn twisting machine, how can the twisting mean apply anything to the machine.
Claim 3 recites “a twist value to the yarn (H)” in lines 3-4 but also recites “a twist value of rolled yarn (α)” in lines 6-7. It is unclear what the difference between the first recitation of “a twist value” is compared to the second. It is further unclear what the difference is between “yarn” and “rolled yarn”.
Claim 3 recites ID1 is an instant diameter of the spool and that ID is the instant diameter of the spool. It is unclear how both of these can be true given the different equations with their usages.
Claim 3 recites “when the yarn structure is modified in a first N-S direction” in line 10. It is unclear what is meant by this phrase. How is the yarn twisting machine able to modify the yarn structure?
Claim 3 recites “when the yarn structure is modified in a second S-N direction” in line 13. It is unclear what is meant by this phrase. How is the yarn twisting machine able to modify the yarn structure?
Claim 3 recites “the yarn twist thereafter being –(β’) is variable along the full spool”. It is unclear if the yarn twist thereafter is negative β’. It is further unclear if the yarn twist is variable or if the equation of β’ is variable.
Claim 3 recites β’ (tpm) = 2 (ID(m)*π). It is unclear what “m” refers to. It appears that “m” may refer to “meters” however this should be explicitly recited, and indeed, the units of “ID” and “ID1” should be recited.
Claim 3 recites that the twisting machine includes a twisting means that applies a particular twist to the yarn, however, there does not appear to be any structure included in the specification other than a ring spinning machine or a two for one twisting machine that is required. Thus it appears than any ring spinning machine or two for one twisting machine would include the ability to function as claimed, absent evidence to the contrary (for example, see Wegmann US 1911864 describing that winding twist changes as the diameter of the spool changes, ll. 33-45).
Claim 4 recites “twisting means” in line 5. Twisting means is already recited in claim 3, and further claim 4. It is unclear if additional twisting means are being claimed, and if so, where support for the additional twisting means is found in the specification.
Claim 4 recites that twisting means apply a twist (Ω) to the yarn, however claim 3 already recites that twisting means applies a twist (Ω) to the yarn so it is unclear what is meant by this phrase.
Claims 4-12 recite “a pickup spool (1)”. It is unclear what the different between pickup spool (1) and spool (1) is. If there is a difference, a different numeral should be used to distinguish the different spools and support for the different spool should be pointed to in the disclosure.
Claims 4-12 recite that twisting means apply a twist (Ω) to the yarn, however claim 3 already recites that twisting means applies a twist (Ω) to the yarn so it is unclear what is meant by this phrase.
Claim 5 recites “twisting means” in line 8. Twisting means is already recited in claim 3. It is unclear if additional twisting means are being claimed, and if so, where support for the additional twisting means is found in the specification.
Claims 6-12 recite “twisting means” in line 7. Twisting means is already recited in claim 3. It is unclear if additional twisting means are being claimed, and if so, where support for the additional twisting means is found in the specification.
Claims 5-12 include the formula (λ) = (1/ID2)*3.1416) which is missing a parenthesis which creates confusion as to the intention of the formula.
Claim 3 includes incorrect usage of a reference numeral. Claim 3 recites “a yarn (H) delivery spool (2)” which should be “a yarn delivery spool (2)”. Next “yarn (H)” should be introduced.
The dependent claims inherit(s) the deficiency by nature of dependency.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK J LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-1145. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th, Alt F: 8:00 AM-5:00 PM ET.
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, Clint Ostrup can be reached on 571-272-5559. 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.
/PATRICK J. LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732