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 Amendment
The amendment filed on March 10, 2026 has been entered and considered and an action on the merits follows.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 10, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argued that Sobota discloses only one of the anvil roller (3) or the pressing roller (4) is driven by a motor (e.g., a drive), as disclosed on page 5, line 37 to page 6, line 2. This argument is not found persuasive because page 5, last line to page 6, first line discloses “both rolls 3, 4 may be provided with a drive” and fig. 1 clearly shows a drive (27) is attached to an end of each of the anvil roller (3) and the pressing roller (4). Therefore, Sobota does disclose each anvil roller (3) and the pressing roller (4) is driven by a motor.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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, 6-7, 9, and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zimmermann (GB 2 004763 A) in view of Sobota et al. (hereinafter "Sobota") (WO 2014/033156 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Zimmermann discloses a method of extracting moisture from wood material (see "peat" on page 1, line 14), the method comprising:
depositing the wood material on a continuous and liquid permeable sheet metal (see "metal" on page 1, line 101) band (2) including viaways (33, also see "screening" on page 1, line 125) and fig. 1) allowing liquid to permeate therethrough (fig. 1), the sheet metal band being located between a first pressing roller (the lowest roller 10 on the left of fig. 1) and a first anvil roller (the lowest roller 9 on the left of fig. 1);
transporting the wood material by moving the sheet metal band (fig. 1);
passing the wood material through a first nip (i.e. the lowest nip between the lowest roller 10 and lowest roller 9 on the left portion of fig. 1) formed by the first pressing roller (10), the first anvil roller (9) and the sheet metal band (2) to extract a portion of the moisture away from the wood material (fig. 1), and
passing the sheet metal band through a second nip (i.e. a nip on the right of the first nip as defined above, see fig. 1) arranged downstream of the first nip (see fig. 1), the second nip being formed by a second pressing roller (i.e. a second roller 10 on the right of the first roller 10 as noted above, see fig. 1) located outside a loop formed by the sheet metal band (2) and a second anvil roller (i.e. a second roller 9 on the right of the first roller 9 as noted above, see fig. 19) located inside the loop (see fig. 1),
wherein at least a portion of the extracted portion (at the first nip as defined above) of the moisture permeates through the viaways of the sheet metal band without using a suction device, a blowing device and a scraping device (see page 2, lines 41-52 and fig. 1, which shows there is no suction device, blowing device and scraping device in a pressing zone).
Zimmermann does not expressly disclose transporting the wood material by moving the sheet metal band at a speed selectable within a range.
Sobota can be applied to teach a method of extracting moisture from wood material (see "wood material" in abstract), wherein the wood material is transported by moving a sheet metal band (5) at a speed selectable within a range for effective dewatering (see page 13, lines 14-20). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to transport the material by moving the sheet metal band of Zimmermann at a speed selectable within a range, as taught by Sobota, for effective dewatering.
As to wherein the first pressing roller and the second pressing roller are driven independently from the first anvil roller and the second anvil roller, Sobota can also be applied to teach a pressing roller (4) and an anvil roller (3), each is provided with a drive (27) (see fig. 1, which shows a drive (27) is attached to an end of each of the anvil roller (3) and the pressing roller (4)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provided each of the pressing roller and the anvil roller of Zimmerman with a drive, as taught by Sobota, to reduce friction and wear, resulting in faster and smoother conveying of the wood material.
Regarding claim 2, the method according to claim 1, modified Zimmermann discloses wherein the selectable speed range includes a speed of 65 feet per minute (fpm) to 110 fpm (see page 13, line 15 of Sobota).
Regarding claim 3, the method according to claim 1, Zimmermann discloses removing debris from the sheet metal band using a cleaning device (16 or 17).
Zimmermann does not disclose the cleaning device disposed inside a loop formed by the sheet metal band.
Sobota discloses a cleaning device (16) can be disposed inside a loop formed by a sheet metal belt (5) (see fig. 7) or outside of the loop (see page 11, lines 27-28).
It would have been obvious matter of choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to place the cleaning device of Zimmermann inside of the loop formed by the metal band, since the placement of the cleaning device inside or outside of the loop are well known in the art as disclosed by Sobota and they do not provide any unexpected results.
Regarding claim 6, the method according to claim 1, Zimmermann does not expressly disclose a moisture content percentage of wood material exiting from the first nip is in a range between 40% to 45%. However, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation when general conditions are disclosed in the prior art. In re Aller, 220F, 2d454, 105 USPQ 233(CCPA 1955). Zimmermann sets forth the general condition of reducing moisture content of wood material using the moisture reducing press and thus it would have been obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skilled before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to output the moisture content in a range between 40%- 45%to achieve the desired dewatering rate.
Regarding claim 7, the method according to claim 1, Zimmermann discloses wherein the sheet metal band is conveyed at an angle with respect to a horizontal plane (see fig. 1) and the angle is between 1 degree and 10 degrees with respect to the horizonal plane (see fig. 1), wherein the horizontal plane is essentially level to a surface upon which the moisture removing press resides (see fig. 1).
Regarding claim 9, the method according to claim 1, Zimmermann discloses the invention substantially as claimed as set forth above. Zimmermann does not disclose applying heat to the wood material using a heating element and heat conductive material located inside a loop formed by the sheet metal band. Sobota can be applied to teach applying heat to a wood material using a heating element (200) and heat conductive material located inside a loop (fig. 14) formed by the sheet metal band (5) (see page 14, third paragraph). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Zimmermann with a heating element and heat conductive material located inside the loop formed by the sheet metal, as taught by Sobota, to accelerate moisture removal.
Regarding claim 24, the method according to claim 1, modified Zimmerman discloses the first pressing roller, the second pressing roller, the first anvil roller, and the second anvil roller are each driven independently by corresponding motors (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 25, the method according to claim 1, modified Zimmermann discloses transporting the wood material by moving the sheet metal band using a conveyor roller and wherein the conveyor roller and the first anvil roller or the second anvil roller are driven by a same motor (It is noted that the claim does not call for “only a same motor”, modified Zimmerman discloses the drive/motor is attached to the anvil roller as set forth above, and thus the conveyor roller and the first anvil roller or the second anvil roller are driven by this drive either directly or indirectly).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zimmermann and Sobota, as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Ipsen (DE 40 38 706 A1).
Modified Zimmermann discloses the invention substantially as claimed as set forth above. Zimmermann does not disclose a guide for directing wood material output from the first nip for guiding the wood material in an inward direction with respect to a center line of the sheet metal band.
Ipsen discloses conveying press having opposing guides (20) positioned along an output of a nip formed by a roller (see fig. 2) and a belt (8) for guiding a material in an inward direction with respect to a center line of the belt (fig. 3) for preventing the material moving away from the belt (fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the press of Zimmermann with opposing guides along an output of the nip, as taught by Ipsen, for preventing the material moving away from the band.
Claims 12-14, 16-17, and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sobota et al. (hereinafter "Sobota") (WO 2014/033156 A1) in view of Zimmermann (GB 2 004 763 A).
Regarding claim 12, Sobota discloses a method of extracting moisture from wood material (see "wood material" in abstract), the method comprising:
depositing the wood material on a continuous and liquid permeable sheet metal (page 6, line 22) band (5) including viaways (fig. 3A) allowing liquid to permeate therethrough (see page 6, lines 19-20), the sheet metal band (5) being located between a first pressing roller (4) and a first anvil roller (3) (fig. 7);
transporting the wood material by moving the sheet metal band at a speed selectable within a range (see page 13, lines 10-20); and
passing the wood material through a first nip formed by the first pressing roller, the first anvil roller and the sheet metal band to extract a portion of the moisture away from the wood material (page 12, lines 15-24),
wherein at least a portion of the extracted portion of the moisture permeates through the viaways (at the nip) of the sheet metal band (page 10, lines 16-27), and
wherein the first nip includes only the first pressing roller (4) and the sheet metal (5) (see fig. 7 or 9), and
wherein the first pressing roller (4) is driven independently from the first anvil roller (3) (see fig. 1, which shows a drive (27) is attached to an end of each of the anvil roller (3) and the pressing roller (4)).
Sobota discloses at least a portion of the extracted portion (at the first nip) of the moisture permeates through the viaways of the sheet metal band using a suction device (6, 11).
Sobota does not disclose the at least a portion of the extracted portion (at the first nip) of the moisture permeates through the viaways of the sheet metal band without using a blowing device, a suction device, and a scraping device.
Zimmermann discloses a method of extracting moisture from wood material (see "peat" on page 1, line 14) as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above. Zimmermann discloses
passing the wood material through a first nip (i.e. the lowest nip between the lowest roller 10 and lowest roller 9 on the left portion of fig. 1) formed by the first pressing roller (10), the first anvil roller (9) and the sheet metal band (2) to extract a portion of the moisture away from the wood material (fig. 1), and
wherein at least a portion of the extracted portion (at the first nip as defined above) of the moisture permeates through the viaways of the sheet metal band without using a suction device, a blowing device and a scraping device (see page 2, lines 41-52 and fig. 1, which shows there is no suction device, blowing device and scraping device in a pressing zone around the nips of the rollers (9, 10)), and the sheet metal band and the rollers (9 and 10) are conveyed at an angle with respect to a horizontal plane.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to remove the suction device of Sobota and rearrange the continuous sheet metal band conveyed between the first pressing roller and the first anvil roller at an angle with respect to a horizontal plane, as taught by Zimmermann, to improve assisting the removal of moisture/liquid by having the press at an angle and to save cost for not using a suction device.
Regarding claim 13, the method according to claim 12, Sobota discloses wherein the selectable speed range includes a speed of 65 feet per minute (fpm) to 110 fpm (see page 13, line 15).
Regarding claim 14, the method according to claim 12, Sobota discloses removing debris from the sheet metal band using a cleaning device (16) disposed inside a loop formed by the sheet metal band (5) (see fig. 7).
Regarding claim 16, as to a moisture content percentage of wood material exiting from the first nip is in a range between 40% to 45%, Sobota discloses a moisture content percentage of wood material output from the moisture removing press is close to a range between 40% to 45% (see page 18, lines 24-25). However, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation when general conditions are disclosed in the prior art. In re Aller, 220F, 2d454, 105 USPQ233(CCPA 1955). Sobota does however set forth the general condition of reducing moisture content of wood material using the moisture reducing press and thus it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skilled before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to output the moisture content in a range between 40% 45% to achieve the desired dewatering rate.
Regarding claim 17, modified Sobota discloses the sheet of metal is conveyed at an angle as set forth above and the angle is between 1 degree and 10 degrees with respect to a horizontal plane (see fig. 1 of Zimmermann) and the horizontal plane is essentially level to a surface upon which the moisture removing press resides (see fig. 1 of Zimmermann).
Regarding claim 19, the method according to claim 12, Sobota discloses further including applying heat to the wood material using a heating element (200) and heat conductive material located inside a loop (fig. 14) formed by the sheet metal band (5) (see page 14, third paragraph).
Regarding claim 20, Sobota, as modified by Zimmermann, discloses the invention substantially as claimed as set forth in the rejection of claim 12 above. Sobota further discloses wherein the first pressing roller (4) is in direct contact with the wood material (2) as it passes through the first nip (see fig. 8a).
Regarding claim 21, the method according to claim 20, Sobota discloses wherein the selectable speed range includes a speed of 65 feet per minute (fpm) to 110 fpm (see page 13, line 15).
Regarding claim 22, the method according to claim 20, Sobota discloses removing debris from the sheet metal band using a cleaning device (16) disposed inside a loop formed by the sheet metal band (5) (see fig. 7).
Claims 15 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sobota and Zimmermann, in further view of Ipsen (DE40 38 706 A1).
Modified Sobota discloses the invention substantially as claimed as set forth above. Sobota does not disclose a guide for directing wood material output from the first nip for guiding the wood material in an inward direction with respect to a center line of the sheet metal band.
Ipsen discloses conveying press having opposing guides (20) positioned along an output of a nip formed by a roller (see fig. 2) and a belt (8) for guiding a material in an inward direction with respect to a center line of the belt (fig. 3) for preventing the material moving away from the belt (fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the press of Sobota with opposing guides along an output of the nip, as taught by Ipsen, for preventing the material moving away from the band.
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 JIMMY T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4520. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am-5pm.
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, CHRISTOPHER L TEMPLETON can be reached at 571-270-1477. 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.
JIMMY T. NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3725
/JIMMY T NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights