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 .
The Applicant’s amendment filed on February 25, 2026 was received. Claim 1 was amended.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S.C. code not included in this action can be found in the prior Office action issued March 20, 2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The rejections of claims 1 and 3-14 as indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are withdrawn because Applicant amended claim 1 to remove the “approximately by one circle” wording which was indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2018/0179075) in view of Byrne et al. (US 2015/0343481) on claims 1 and 6-14 are maintained. The rejections are restated below.
Regarding claim 1: Kim et al. discloses an apparatus (100) for preparing an aerogel blanket having a conveyor belt (120) formed of a plurality of rollers which are transport means, meant to convey the blanket (10) from a supply roller (110) to a collection roller (150) which are both additional transport means, further including a silica sol precursor supply member (130) which is a first spray means configured to spray a sol onto the blanket (10) as it is supported by a first set of the conveyor (120) rollers, and a gel catalyst supply member (140) configured to spray a gel catalyst onto the blanket (10) while it is supported by the second set of conveyor belt (120) rollers (pars. 40-49, figure 2).
Kim et al. fails to explicitly disclose that the transport means are drums, a wall of which is configured to transport the blanket in a circumferential direction while the spray means spray the materials from inside the drums to the substrate. However, Byrne et al. discloses a similar web coating apparatus which uses rolls (10) that both convey the web substrate (50) along the exterior surfaces (14) of the rolls (10) and provide a coating fluid from the interior region (16) thereof through a main artery (22) which is a spray pipe and out through a number of other channels (20) to the substrate (50) through exits (30) on the exterior surface (14), where a number of such rolls (10) (i.e. 6 rolls) can be provided to transport and coat a number of materials onto a substrate (50) in succession (pars. 79-81, 113, figures 1-2, 22). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use transport and application rolls (10) like those taught by Byrne et al. for the conveyor and spray apparatuses of Kim et al. because Byrne et al. teaches that this helps reduce imprecise, slow and costly material application when applying multiple materials to a substrate (pars. 2-5).
Kim et al. also fails to explicitly disclose that the blanket (10) runs around the roll wall by more than ¾ of the circumference for each roll. However, Byrne et al. discloses that the roll (10) can have many different configurations, including one (10CYMK) in which a number of main arteries (22C, 22Y, 22M, 22K) and trees (23C, 23Y, 23M, 23K) are arranged to supply ink to nearly the entire circumference of the roll (10) (par. 114) and further teaches that in one process this single roll can apply inks from each artery (22C, 22Y, 22M, 22K) to one substrate (par. 207) such that the substrate has to be run around nearly its entire circumference (figure 23). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a roll (10CYMK) like that of Byrne et al. to supply liquid over its entire surface to the blanket of Kim et al. because Byrne et al. teaches that it is functionally equivalent to using partial surfaces of other rolls (par. 114) and other conventional printing apparatuses (68) (pars. 207-208) and simple substitution of functional equivalents is not considered to be a patentable advance (MPEP 2143, 2144.06).
Regarding claim 6: Kim et al. and Byrne et al. show that the coating arrangement can also include a backing roll (200) and other guide rolls arranged adjacent to any of the coating rolls (10) (Byrne et al. figure 22).
Regarding claim 7: Kim et al. and Byrne et al. disclose the above combination in which the main artery (22) is a spray pipe arranged inside the roll (10), which can have the same central axis (12) as the roll (10) such that it rotates with the roll along its own axis, further having a number of capillaries (24) which are through holes that allow it to spray the material onto the substrate (Byrne et al. pars. 83-84, figures 1-3).
Regarding claim 8: Kim et al. and Byrne et al. disclose that the arteries (22) can also be fed from pipes connected by rotary unions (230) such that the pipes can rotate independently (Byrne et al. par. 170), and while Byrne et al. fails to explicitly disclose rotating the pipes in a direction opposite to that of the corresponding roll (10), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try rotating them in a direction opposite to the roll (10) because trying from a finite number of solutions (i.e. same direction or opposite direction) is not considered to be a patentable advance (MPEP 2143E).
Regarding claim 9: Kim et al. and Byrne et al. disclose the above rotating pipes at the rotary unions (230) and while Byrne et al. fails to explicitly disclose that there is a driving mechanism to drive the rotation of the pipes, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a drive mechanism to rotate them because automating a manual activity is not considered to be a patentable advance (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding claim 10: Kim et al. and Byrne et al. disclose the above combination in which the silica sol (20) and gel catalyst (30) are supplied from storage containers and delivery pipes (see Kim et al. figure 2), and in the combination they would be similarly supplied to the main arteries (22) of the corresponding rolls (10).
Regarding claims 11 and 13: Kim et al. and Byrne et al. disclose the above combination in which each station can have a plurality of rolls (10a, 10b) arranged on opposite sides of the substrate (50) such that they apply material to opposite sides of the substrate (50) in the thickness direction thereof (Byrne et al. par. 112, figure 20). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use multiple rolls (10a,b) in each station- i.e. the silica sol station and the gel catalyst station, respectively- of Kim et al. because simple duplication of parts is not considered to be a patentable advance (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding claims 12 and 14: Kim et al. and Byrne et al. show that the transport direction on each of the rolls (10a, 10b) can be considered opposite to each other in the vertical direction (i.e. the first roll moves the substrate upwardly and the second roll moves the substrate downwardly) (see Byrne et al. figure 20).
The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Kim et al. and Byrne et al. as applied to claims 1 and 6-14 above, and further in view of Maher (US 2,379,020). on claims 3-5 are maintained. The rejections are restated below.
Regarding claim 3: Kim et al. and Byrne et al. disclose the above combination in which the rolls have a central pipe that feeds the coating fluid to the substrate at the exterior surface, but fails to explicitly disclose that the wall of the roll is composed of a plurality of transmission shafts arranged at intervals around the central axis on a frame, parallel to the central axis, and with gaps between them forming the opening. However, Maher discloses another type of coating roller which is formed of a plurality of rollers (12) which are transmission shafts fixed to end plates (48, 32) which are both frames, along which a screen is fed circumferentially and where a coating (40) is configured to be applied from within the main roller at a gap formed by two of the rollers (12) at the exterior of the main roller, with some of the rollers (12) being driven (col. 2 lines 33+, col. 3 lines 1-37, figures 1-2 and 4-5). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a roller structure comprising a number of other rollers as taught by Maher for the apparatus of Kim et al. and Byrne et al. because Maher teaches that this is another functionally equivalent roller mechanism for coating an object through the inside of the roller (col. 2 lines 33+, col. 3 lines 1-37) and simple substitution of functional equivalents is not considered to be a patentable advance (MPEP 2143, 2144.06).
Regarding claim 4: Kim et al., Byrne et al., and Maher teach that each roll is provided with a drive motor (210) to effect its rotation about its axis (Byrne et al. par. 168, figure 39).
Regarding claim 5: Kim et al., Byrne et al. and Maher teach the above combination in which the rollers (12) are connected to the frames (48, 32) such that they can still roll with the movement of the endless belt (28) around them about their own axes, the rollers (12) connected to each other via the other frame (48, 32) which can be considered a linkage assembly (Maher figures 1-5). In the combination with Kim et al. and Byrne et al. each roll is provided with its own drive motor (210) (Byrne et al. par. 168) which would drive the main roller structure to rotate causing the individual rollers (12) to also rotate as a consequence of the feeding of the substrate (50) over the rollers (12), such that the same drive motor (210) is configured to indirectly drive each of the rollers (12).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 25, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant primarily argues that the teaching of Byrne et al. regarding figure 23 does not suggest winding a substrate around more than 3/4 of the roll circumference, and also that Byrne et al. does not teach that the rolls can spray fluid.
In response:
Regarding figure 23 of Byrne et al., Applicant’s arguments seem to ignore the cited portion of Byrne et al. which discusses this figure, namely paragraph 207, which specifically says that the roll (18CYMK) can indeed be the only roll present in a print system (70) according to one embodiment. Applicant’s argument seems to be based on the idea that all of the other configurations shown only show the substrate touching a small section of each roll, but as Applicant notes, those are separate embodiments. Byrne et al. clearly states that the figure 23 embodiment is used as one single roll having fluid exits (30) all over its circumference in order to apply all of the inks to the substrate, which necessarily requires the substrate to wrap around all of those sections, meaning much more than ¾ of the circumference of the roll. Byrne et al. does not say that this roll (18CYMK) can be one roll of many in a print system (70), rather that this is the one roll used. Having this one roll provided with the number of fluid exits (30) shown without all or even most of them being used is not a fair and reasonable reading of the invention of Byrne et al.- one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that using the roll pictured in figure 23 would clearly and obviously require the substrate wrapped around at least ¾ of the circumference. Further, the idea that this density of exits (30) can’t be practically used lacks any evidence, and entirely ignores the fact that the fluids being used by Byrne et al. do not necessarily need to be inks which can smear (par. 68).
Regarding the term spray, this is a broad term which has no specific parameters discussed in either the instant claims or the specification. Byrne et al. supplies a fluid to the inside of the rolls and pressurizes this fluid so that it exits the rolls onto the substrate. Supplying a pressurized fluid through a narrow passageway can indeed be considered spraying, once it exits that passageway. Further, Byrne et al. remains the secondary reference of the combination- Kim et al. still clearly shows that the sol and catalyst are sprayed with a spray fan pattern (figure 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 STEPHEN A KITT whose telephone number is (571)270-7681. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
/S.A.K/
Stephen KittExaminer, Art Unit 1717
4/29/2026
/Dah-Wei D. Yuan/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1717
Prosecution Insights